9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such service providers at times are issued in favor of the CHA subsequently the CHA though bear the service charges but collect the reimbursement from the appellant. From the invoice it can be seen that, in the service provider s invoice that is issued by M/s Indev Logistics Pvt. Ltd. the name of appellant is appearing as shipper name and in the corresponding invoice of the 4 Star Enterprises which is the appellant s CHA is showing the exact amount of M/s Indev Logistics Pvt. Ltd. therefore the proper co-relation has been established. Considering both the invoices it is established that the service provider M/s Indev Logistics Pvt. Ltd. has provided services to the appellant M/S Khushi Enterprise. In this fact the service tax paid in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the service tax payment invoice issued by the service provider in favor of CHA bearing the name of the appellant and subsequently invoiced by CHA to the appellant are valid document for refund of service tax against the export of goods in terms of notification No 41/2012-ST dated 29-06-2012. (ii) Whether, pre-shipment inspection is an input services and liable for service tax paid thereon is liable to be refunded under notification No. 41/2012 ST. 2. Shri, Devashish K. Trivedi, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant at the outset submits that as regard the first issue that whether the invoices are proper or otherwise, though the invoice was issued by the service provider to the CHA, but the same invoice also bears the na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Parekh Plast (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi 2012 (25) STR 46 (Tri.-Ahmd.) 3. On the other hand Shri, R.K. Agarwal Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by the both sides and perusal of record. We find that the lower authorities have rejected the refund claim under Notification No. 41/2012 on the ground that the invoice of service is not in the name of the appellant whereas the same is in the name of CHA. we find that the CHA was appointed by the appellant as their Custom House agent who acts on behalf of the appellant, therefore as authorized person of the appellant, when CHA arrange ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d used for export of goods is clearly refundable to the appellant. 4.4 This identical issue has been considered by this tribunal in the case of Chamundi Taxtiles limited wherein the tribunal has held that Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the assessee on the invoice even though raised on the agent of assessee who had discharged liability which would have otherwise being discharged by them. In the case of Chamundi Textiles Ltd. reported in 2011 (217) ELS 37 the tribunal held that even though a document is in the name of another entity but on account of assessee credit cannot be denied on such document. Considering this decision in the case of refund also even though the invoice was raised to the agent of the appellant the refund cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
