Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2020 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 1001 - AT - Service TaxRefund of accumulated CENVAT Credit - output services exported for the period April, 2016 to June, 2016 - Research & Development Service - Garden Maintenance service - recruitment services - Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Research & Development Service - HELD THAT:- The Research & Development Service performed by the Appellant is export of service in terms of Rule 3 of Rules, 2012. Earlier also for the period July, 2012 to September, 2012, October, 2012 to December, 2012 and January, 2013 to March 2013, the said services were treated as export of services by the department and no relevant material has been placed on record to treat the same differently for the period in dispute - Therefore the Scientific and Technical Consultancy Services provided by the Appellant to DITC is to be treated as export of service. Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was amended vide Notification No. 18/2012-CE (NT) dated 17/03/2012 and after amendment the said rule provides that the refund of Cenvat credit is allowed to service provider when the output service is exported. After amendment of the said Rule, no nexus is relevant between input or input services with the output service and therefore the present refund claim which relates to the period April, 2016 to June, 2016 is correctly availed by the Appellant for the aforesaid service - refund allowed. Garden Maintenance service - HELD THAT:- The Principal Bench of the Tribunal in the matter of M/S HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD VERSUS C.C.E. NOIDA [2015 (8) TMI 595 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] held that the garden service qualified as input services and therefore following the said principle, this refund claim is allowed. Recruitment service - service was rejected on the ground that there is no nexus between the recruitment service and the output service provided by the Appellant - HELD THAT:- A co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the matter of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE PUNE-I VERSUS SAI LIFE SCIENCES LTD. [2016 (2) TMI 724 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has held that since the company therein has recruited the employees having vast experience in research, therefore credit is admissible - refund allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|