Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 1338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... put services for which payment was made under the Heads Inland Haulage THC Freight, B L Charges, Destination Delivery Charges, Handling Charges, Crane Charges, Technical Testing Charges, Inspection Charges and GTS Services etc. and have filed refund claims under Notification No.41/2007- ST dated 06.10.2007. Revenue disputed the claim and issued Show Cause Notices dated 17.07.2009, 16.07.2009, 16.07.2009 and 17.07.2009 for the refund claims filed for the period January to March 2008, April to June 2008, July to September 2008 and October to December 2008 respectively; the Show Cause Notices were decided by the Original Authority vide Orders-in-Original dated 22.02.2010 rejecting the refunds claimed; on an appeal filed by the appellants, lear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... means and was also successful to that extent indirectly but the fact remains that the condition of the Notification is not satisfied. He submits that it was held that non-mentioning of invoice number or shipping bill number or container number in other documents cannot be a bar for availing refund in the following cases: * Arihant Tiles and Marbles (P) Ltd- 2019 (20) GSTL 21 (Raj.) dated 10.05.2018. * Dolphins Knit Pvt. Ltd. - 2017 (49) STR 431 (Tri. Del.). 4. Learned Consultant further submits that denial of refund of service tax paid on GTA Services and transportation of goods by Rail is incorrect as the said services are qualified to be considered as Port Services as clarified by CBEC Circular No.334/1/2010-TRU dated 26.02.2010. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rvices availed only from the ICD to the Port and that he can explain the same to the satisfaction of the Original Authority in case the issue is remanded back to the Original Authority. He also submits that he would submit the copies of the Agreement in respect of the Inspection and Testing charges before the Adjudicating Authority. 8. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. The main contention of the appellants is that they are eligible for the refund of service tax paid on the services availed by them in course of export by whatever name the said services are availed in terms of the Board's Circular cited above. It is also the contention of the appellant that learned Commissioner (Appeals) has given a categorical finding th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nal in the case of SRF Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur-I reported in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 980 (Tri.-Del.), wherein it has been held that different services provided within the port shall merit consideration for refund in terms of the notification referred supra. With regard to the CHA service, we find that the service providers have provided such service on export of goods by the appellant. Further, the GTA services have been availed by the appellant for transportation of goods up to to port of export. Since, export of goods in question has not been disputed by the Department, service tax paid on the taxable services used for ultimte exportation of goods, in our opinion, should merit consideration for refund in terms of the Notification dated 6- 10-2007. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the appellants. Also, in the case of Inspection and Testing Charges, as per their own averment, the appellants did not submit the copies of agreements before the Original Authority; the appeals as far as these charges are concerned also require to be verified by the Original Authority only to the extent of verification of concerned agreements. I am also of the considered opinion that the credit of service tax paid for C & F Services shall be admissible only w.e.f. 07.12.2008. I find that the other objections raised by the Department regarding non-mentioning of container/ shipping bill number etc. in the GTA Service invoices is not acceptable in view of the judgments cited above. 10. In view of the above, the appeals are partly allowed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates