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 (11) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s provided by the appellant - appellant is a 100% EOU unit and provided export services which includes typesetting, composition, artwork, proof reading, project management, XML conversions, multimedia services and page designing, proof reading etc., to overseas clients HELD THAT:- Department had allowed the refund claims for the earlier period from January 2008 to March 2008 and also for the subsequent period from October 2010 to September 2013 i.e., much after the rejection of the present refund claims i.e., in the year 2019. The department has not raised any issue of the services provided by them while sanctioning the refund claims for the period October 2010 to September 2013. We find that the principle laid down in the case of mPortal I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Learned Chartered Accountants appearing for the appellant has submitted that these grounds relate to question of law and not elaborated in the earlier grounds, hence, may be allowed to be taken on record. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue has no objection. Consequently, the miscellaneous applications are allowed and the grounds now mentioned in the miscellaneous applications shall be part of the grounds of appeals. 2. These three appeals are filed against Order-in-Appeal No.65 to 67/2014-ST dated 13.01.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are registered with the Service Tax department for providing Business Auxiliary Servi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are either provided to their overseas customers through their group entity situated abroad or to their customers directly. He has submitted that they availed CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid on various input services viz., office rent, consultancy and professional services, tele-communication/internet services, manpower recruitment consultancy services, housekeeping services, repair and maintenance, courier charges, security services, Tour Operator Services, printing and stationery, Bank charges, etc. On export of the service, they filed a refund claim of accumulated CENVAT credit as per Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. It is his contention that the learned adjudicating authority rejected their refund claims for three quarters solely on the ground th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... KPTI Cumins Infosystems Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I: 2013 (32) STR 356 (Tri.-Mum.) ; M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd. vs. CCE ST, BBSR: 2018 (11) TMI 918 CESTAT KOLKATA. 5. Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. The short issue involved in the present appeals for consideration is whether the appellant is entitled to cash refund of accumulated CENVAT credit for the quarters April 2008 to September 2008, October 2008 to March 2009 and April 2009 to September 2009. Undisputed facts are that appellant is a 100% EOU unit and provided export services which includes typesetting, composition, artwork, proof rea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ds but the grounds on which the adjudicating authority rejected their refund claims are different and never proposed; hence, the order of the rejection of refund is bad in law. From the records, I find that the department had allowed the refund claims for the earlier period from January 2008 to March 2008 and also for the subsequent period from October 2010 to September 2013 i.e., much after the rejection of the present refund claims i.e., in the year 2019. The department has not raised any issue of the services provided by them while sanctioning the refund claims for the period October 2010 to September 2013. I find that the principle laid down by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions (supra) i .....

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