Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 797 - AT - Service TaxRefund claim - relevant date - What should be the relevant date for filing the refund u/r 5 / N/N. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.6.2012? - Held that:- As per the Larger Bench decision in the case of Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (2) TMI 946 - CESTAT BANGALORE], it was held that in case of refund under Rule 5, the relevant date is the end of the quarter wherein the FIRC is received - In the facts of the present case, the refund for the period October 2012 to December 2012, the refund was submitted on 30.9.2013, which shows that the refund was filed within one year from the end of the quarter. Therefore, it is well within the prescribed time as provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act - refund allowed. Refund claim - export of services - input services - general insurance services - real estate agent’s services - stock broker services - online information and data access or retrieved services - club or association services - sponsorship services - nexus with export of services - Held that:- All the services disputed by the Commissioner (Appeals) are admissible input services, hence the credit is available. The adjudicating authority, without issuance of SCN as regards the admissibility of the input service, rejected the refund which is not permissible, but the Revenue is of the view that the credit is not admissible. The first step is to a show cause notice invoking Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for denial of the cenvat credit. Then only the refund can be rejected which was not done. Obviously the refund cannot be rejected by disputing the admissibility of the input services. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|