9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h refund is claimed and most of the services are common to all the appeals, a common order is being passed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. The refund of service tax claimed on port services has been rejected on the ground that the appellant have not got invoice from the service provider but from the CHA and also for the reason that the service provider was neither the port nor authorised by the port . It was submitted by the appellants that the CHA has acted as a pure agent and has collected the amount from them and paid to the service provider and appellants have provided all the documents and proof of payment of service tax and therefore they are eligible. The very same issue had come up before the Tribunal earlier and this T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the invoice or any other document that may be produced by the appellants before a decision is taken. 4. As regards GTA service, the refund claim has been rejected on the ground that for transport of goods from ICD to port of export, details like shipping bill number, export invoice number, description of export goods etc. are not available. It was submitted on behalf of the appellants that they have enough evidence to link the goods with the invoices for claim of service tax on GTA service. In this regard the appellants relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Dishman Pharma and Chemicals Ltd. 2011 (21) STR 246 (Tri. Ahmd.). I find that in this decision the Tribunal took a view that refund claim cannot be rejected on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced that this decision is squarely applicable. Appellants have to show non availment of cenvat credit by the manufacturer and the fact of payment of service tax by them and fulfilment of other conditions to be eligible for refund of service tax paid on technical testing and analysis service. 6. The GTA service received for transportation of empty container to the premises of exporter is also admissible in view of the fact that the notification provides for refund of service tax paid in respect of services used in relation to export and in this case it cannot be denied that the transport of empty container to the exporter s premises was necessary and was received in relation to exported goods. 7. One of the claims has been re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
