Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 359 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH
Refund claim - rejection on the ground that the services like THC, BC charges, handling, LDD. TSC. documentation charges are not specified service under Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute with regard to availing of the services for the purpose of export as well as payment of service tax thereon. This issue has been considered by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, UDAIPUR VERSUS M/S. ARIHANT TILES AND MARBLES (P) LTD. [2019 (1) TMI 73 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held it is an admitted fact of the record that the services towards terminal and other handling services were availed by the assessee within the port area, in connection with export of the goods. Thus, irrespective of classification of service, since the same are provided within the port for export of goods, the benefit of refund should be available under the head port services in terms of notification dated 6-10-2017.
Thus, registration under a particular service is not necessary for the purpose of exemption under Notification No. 41/07 - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.