Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 804 - CESTAT KOLKATARefund of service tax on input services used for export of services without payment of service tax - rejection on the ground of improper address in the invoice, non-mention of address in the invoice, etc. - whether just because of procedural error in the invoices for input services with regard to the address of the Appellant, can the substantive benefit of refund be denied to the Appellant? - HELD THAT:- It is found from the records that the error in address can at best be termed to be a clerical error for which the Appellant has also produced certificate from the Service provider clarifying the error in the floor number. Hence, when the receipt of services is not in dispute, the benefit of refund should not be denied to the Appellant as per the settled jurisprudence in this regard. Reliance placed in the judgment of SAMBHAJI VERSUS GANGABAI [2008 (11) TMI 393 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it has been held that A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory, the procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid to justice. Any interpretation which eludes or frustrates the recipient of justice is not to be followed. Processual law is not to be a tyrant but a servant, not an obstruction but an aid to justice. A procedural prescription is the handmaid and not the mistress, a lubricant, not a resistant in the administration of justice. The department is directed to process the refund claim within 8 weeks from the submission of the order copy as per the process of law - appeal allowed.
|