Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 1346 - AT - Service TaxRefund of accumulated CENVAT Credit - Input services utilised for the services exported during the period 01/01/2011 to 31/03/2011 and 1/4/2011 to 30/6/2011 - Limitation for the purpose of filing refund claims in respect of unutilised credit of input services used in the export services - rejection of refund on various grounds namely the portion of refund claim is barred by limitation as the refund claim was filed beyond the period of one year from the date of export; the refund claim was not supported by certain documents listed; there is no nexus between input services on which credit was availed and the output service exported; the appellant has not produced concrete evidence in support of utilisation of input services in the export of service as required under Rule 5 read with Rule 2(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001; the appellant did not state clearly whether the input services were totally used for export of services or were partially used and that the appellant had not fulfilled the eligibility criterion for refund of service tax paid on the input services used for providing taxable output service exported from the registered premises during the disputed period. HELD THAT:- Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CCE & CST, BENGALURU SERVICE TAX-I VERSUS M/S. SPAN INFOTECH (INDIA) PVT. LTD. [2018 (2) TMI 946 - CESTAT BANGALORE] has set the issue to rest by observing that the relevant date can be taken as end of the quarter in which FIRC is received since the refund claim is filed for the quarter. Thus, the relevant date for filing refund claims should be the end of the quarter in which FIRC are received. CBEC Circular dt. 19/01/2010 clarified as submitted by the appellant regarding the nexus and the manner to deal with the voluminous records - The appellants have also submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any finding on various case laws cited by them and the lower authority has not given them enough time to submit the records sought for, though they have been given in CD form. We find that such an action by the lower authorities is clear violation of principles of natural justice. It is the bounden duty of the authorities to examine the claim of the appellants in view of the provisions of law, Departmental circulars and legal pronouncements in this regard. The authorities are expected to go through the records of the case and the submissions of the appellants to evaluate the claim of the appellants on nexus between input and output services and receipt of consideration - the issue needs to go back to the lower authorities to re-examine the issue. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|