TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the export of output service. In the present case the applicants failed to show that the services which received in 2008-2010 were used in the output services which are exported in 2011-12. As per the provisions of Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) where the procedure has been prescribed in filing refund under Section 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 it has been specifically provided that refund is to be filed before the expiry of the period specified under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. In view of the above the applicants failed to show that input services regarding which refund claim is filed are used in providing the output service as the refund claim is in respect of the services which were received during the period 2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est. 5. The contention of the applicant is that the applicants filed a refund claim on 24.4.2012 in respect of export of services during the period 2012-12. Hence the applicants are entitled for refund in view of the provisions of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as well as the provisions of Notification No. 05/2006-CE(NT) dated 14.03.2006. The contention is that the refund claim is filed within one year from the export of service. Hence the time limit provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act are not applicable. The applicants also rely upon the Board's Circular No. 120/01/2010-ST dated 19.1.2010. The contention is that as per the circular it has been clarified that refund claims are to be quarterly in financial ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund of the service tax paid on the input services which are used for the output services which were exported, therefore the onus is on the applicants to show that the service tax paid on the services in respect of which refund claim is being filed are used for the export of output service. In the present case the applicants failed to show that the services which received in 2008-2010 were used in the output services which are exported in 2011-12. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shell (I) Pvt. Ltd (supra) held in para 7 as under: Finally they have concluded by saying that decision is to be taken by the field officials regarding eligibility of not only a particular service as an input service, but also th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
