9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 849X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal while allowing appeal of the appellant therein allowed refund claim under Rule 5 ibid by holding that since provision of Rule 14 ibid has not been invoked refund of cenvat credit, as claimed by the appellant under Rule 5, cannot be denied. In the appellant's own case State Street Syntel Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CGST & Service Tax, Navi Mumbai [2023 (12) TMI 569 - CESTAT MUMBAI], while taking note of the decisions of this Tribunal, this Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant and held that denial of cenvat credit can be done by issuance of notice under Rule 14 ibid and it cannot be rejected solely under Rule 5 ibid. It is settled principle that there cannot be two different yard sticks i.e. one for allowing the cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by Revenue by modifying the six Orders-in-Original impugned therein to that extent. 2. The issue involved in these appeals is whether the authorities below are justified in rejecting the refund claim in respect of certain services as ineligible input service in terms of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 being 'no nexus' with the exported output services without taking any recourse to Rule 14 ibid? 3. The facts leading to the filing of the instant Appeals are stated in brief as follows. The appellant-assessee had filed 6 refund claims for the period in issue i.e. October 2012 to June, 2014 under Rule 5 ibid read with Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012 for the refund of unutilized accumulated credit earned on the inp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 14 ibid has not been invoked refund of cenvat credit, as claimed by the appellant under Rule 5, cannot be denied. Relevant paragraphs of the said order are reproduced hereunder:- "xxx xxx xxxx 5........There is no doubt that Rule 5 ibid provides for refund of accumulated Cenvat credit subject to compliance of the procedure/guideline laid down under the notifications issued thereunder. The refund of Cenvat credit on the services in issue was mainly denied to the Appellant on the ground of 'no nexus' between the input services and the export services. The issue which falls for consideration in these Appeals is whether the department can deny refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 ibid alleging that there was no nexus between the outp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant are allowed with consequential relief, if any." Similar view was taken by this Tribunal in the matters viz. Service Tax Appeal No.87174/2019 titled as M/s. Sequoia Capital India Advisors Pvt.Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai Central vide Final Order No.A/86138/2022 dated 01.12.2022 and Service Tax Appeal No.87845/2019;M/s.KKR India Advisors Pvt.Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai Central decided vide Final Order No.86106-86107/2022 dated 25.11.2022. 5. In the appellant's own case being Service Tax Appeal No.87808/2019 titled as State Street Syntel Services Pvt.Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CGST & Service Tax, Navi Mumbai vide Final Order No.A/87226/2023 dated 13.12.2023, while taking note of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
