Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2016 (7) TMI 1346 - HC - Service Tax100% EOU - Refund of unutilised CENVAT credit - Whether the CESTAT is correct in holding that the assessee was within time in claiming refund without discussing the Sec. 11B relevant for refunds under Rule 5 of CCR 2004 read with N/N. 05/2006-C.E. (N.T.) dated 14-3-2006 and merely relying on the decision of Hon ble CESTAT Mumbai in the case of CCE Pune-I v. Eaton Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2010 (12) TMI 71 - CESTAT MUMBAI ? - Held that - the decision in Bechtel s case 2013 (7) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI being a decision rendered by Division Bench was approved and held to prevail - it was held in the case that In case of export of Services export is complete only when foreign exchange is received in India relevant date of export of services is date of receipt of foreign exchange - decided against Revenue. Whether CESTAT is correct in holding that the assessee is eligible to claim of refund of Cenvat credit on construction service relying on case of Infosys Ltd. 2014 (3) TMI 695 - CESTAT BANGALORE where it was held that assessee is entitled to the Cenvat credit on construction services? - Held that - the appellant in the Grounds of Appeal mentioned that as against the Infosys Ltd. s case (supra) the department filed appeal before the Hon ble Apex Court and the same is pending but failed to produce copy of the Grounds of Appeal or any stay order granted by Hon ble Apex Court staying the judgment in Infosys Ltd. s case (supra). It is also not known whether a final order is passed by the Apex Court in the said alleged appeal. In these circumstances we can only uphold the decision of the CESTAT Bangalore relying on Infosys Ltd. s case - decided against Revenue. Whether the Tribunal is correct in remanding the matter with regard to the claim of refund of Cenvat credit on other services such as courier service repair or maintenance services telephone service rent-a-cab service management consultant service chartered accountant service etc. since the said services are not having nexus with their output services i.e. Consulting Engineering Service which was exported online? - Held that - This point is concerned the CESTAT Bangalore only remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority to consider the other refund claims afresh. As such we do not find any infirmity or irregularity therein. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|