Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1494 - AT - Service Tax100% EOU - Refund of unutilised CENVAT Credit - rejection of refund on the ground that appellant has not established the nexus of the input services with the output services provided - second ground for rejection of refund is that the ITSS services and Consulting Engineering Services were not taxable prior to 2008 - HELD THAT:- A perusal of Rule 5 contained in CCR 2004 would show that it does not say that the appellant has to establish the nexus of the input services with the output services. The refund is eligible of the credit of the input services which are used for output services. The appellant has provided details of various services that were used during the relevant period for providing output services. Major part of the refund is for the period prior 01.04.2011 and a small amount of refund is for period after 01.04.2011. On perusal of the nature of the services, it is seen that in the case of M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, LTU, MUMBAI [2016 (8) TMI 123 - CESTAT MUMBAI] the issue of nexus and the eligibility of credit of all services impugned herein were considered by the Tribunal and held in favour of the assessee - Similarly, in the case of MPORTAL INDIA WIRELESS SOLUTIONS (P.) LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX [2011 (9) TMI 450 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] as well as KPIT CUMMINS INFOSYSTEMS LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-I [2013 (7) TMI 124 - CESTAT MUMBAI], it was held that refund cannot be rejected on the ground that ITSS services were not taxable prior to 2008. It is also to be pointed out that though the refund claim was rejected that prior to 2008, the output services are not taxable and therefore credit is not eligible, no show cause notice is so far issued proposing to recover any wrongly availed credit. The rejection of refund is unsustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|