TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exported, under Rule 5 of the Service Tax Credit Rules, 2005, read with Notification 11/2005-ST. Therefore, the appellant would be eligible for the refund of service tax paid on input services. Time bar issue - Held that:- the lower adjudicating authority is directed to verify the date of payment of service tax in respect of seven refund claims pertaining to the period April 2007 to April 2009 and verify whether the refund claims have been filed beyond the period of one year from the date of payment of service tax and if so, the appellant would not be entitled for any refund at all - matter remanded back. - ST/570 & 576 to 581/2011, ST/33 & 509/2012 - Final Order Nos. A/31-39/2014-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 18-12-2013 - P R Chandrasek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lower appellate authority who has also upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved of the same the appellant is before us. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant makes the following submissions: 3.1 In appellant's own case, this Tribunal vide final order No. A/503-508/13/CSTB/C-I dated 12/03/2013 held that the services provided to customers of the Foreign Telecom Service Provider as international inbound roamers while they are in India using appellant's telecom network is export of service' as the service is rendered to the foreign telecom service provider who is located outside India and, therefore, the same amounts to export of service under the Export of Service Rules, 2005. While coming to the said co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mits that the Revenue has challenged the decision in the case of Paul Merchants ltd. (supra) before the hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has admitted the appeal filed by the Revenue vide STA No. 5 of 2013. Similarly, in respect of the order passed by the Tribunal in the appellant's own case, Revenue has challenged the same before the hon'ble Bombay High Court. In view of the above, it is submitted that the decisions in favour of the appellant in the above cases are in jeopardy. 4.1 As regards the issue of time-bar, it is submitted that even though Notification 11/2005-ST does not prescribe a time-limit of one year from the date of payment of duty, the provisions of Section 11B have been made applicable to Service Tax mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on constitutes export of services. This decision has been rendered after considering the provisions of Export of Service Rules, 2005 and also based on the Board's Circular No. 111/05/2009-ST dated 24/02/2009. Apart from the above, the ratio of the decision in the Paul Merchants Ltd. case has also been applied. Though the Punjab Haryana High Court has admitted the appeal of the revenue against Paul Merchant Ltd. case, no stay has been granted. Similarly, the devising in appellant's own case though stated to have been challenged before the hon'ble Bombay High Court, no stay has been obtained. Therefore, on merits, the appellants has a case and therefore, the appellant should be eligible for refund of the service tax paid on inpu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attract time-bar and only two claims covered by Order-in-Appeal dated 24/10/2011 and 17/04/2012 is not hit by the time-bar aspect. However, the lower adjudicating authority is directed to verify the date of payment of service tax in respect of seven refund claims pertaining to the period April 2007 to April 2009 and verify whether the refund claims have been filed beyond the period of one year from the date of payment of service tax and if so, the appellant would not be entitled for any refund at all. Thus, in respect of the seven claims pertaining to the period April 2007 and April 2009, the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of verification as to whether the claims are time-barred or not. As reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
