Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1796 - AT - Service TaxRefund of service tax - services procured for rendering of ‘authorised operations’ - exempt goods or not - denial of refund on the ground of non-compliance with the conditions of the N/N. 40/2012-ST dated 20 June 2012 at serial no. 3(f)(ii) therein inasmuch as the debit notes are not acceptable as valid substitutes for invoice and that these were not serially numbered - HELD THAT:- Objections may be raised to protect the interest of revenue but not at the cost of statutory entitlement and, in the absence of any evidence of ineligibility, there is no conflict with interest of revenue insofar as the claim for refund is concerned. In CUMMINS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA LTD. VERSUS CCE & ST, MEERUT [2018 (5) TMI 565 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that rejection of refund application by the authorities below by placing reliance on the notification dated 3.3.2009 cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. On perusal of notification no. 40/2012-ST dated 20 June 2012 it is seen that the structure is split into two paragraphs. Both are independent components with compliance of the latter not a condition enumerated in the former - the substantive compliance of the latter will not in any way dilute the several decisions on strict compliance. Debit notes are frequently used in commercial transactions especially when the contractual arrangements are spread over longer periods and adjustments between the two parties are occasioned at regular intervals. Mere non-enumeration in rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994, or within the procedure of the notification, will not detract from the entitlement to be sanctioned with the refund. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|