Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 239 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2015 (11) TMI 239 - CESTAT MUMBAI - 2016 (41) S.T.R. 109 (Tri. - Mumbai) - Denial of refund claim - services used for export of goods - Business Support Service, Clearing and Forwarding Service, Bank and Financial Services - Notification No. 52/2011-ST 13/12/2011 - Held that:- Appellant have subsequently made refund claim under Notification 52/2011-ST instead of Notification 41/201-ST. Therefore, I am of the view that refund is clearly covered by Notification No. 52/2011-ST and not by 41/2012-ST .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in any other service then appellant is entitled for the refund. But if it is found that service tax paid under the business support service irrespective of the nature of the service the appellants is not entitled for the refund. As regard the clearing and forwarding services from the bill of the service provider it can be seen that the bill was raised by the clearing and forwarding agent, therefore apparently the service for which the bill is raised is for clearing and forwarding service. In th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r : Shri. Vinay Jain. C. A. For the Respondent : Shri. S.V. Nair, Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. NGP/EXCUS/000/APPL/784/13-14 dtd. 27/8/2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs & Central Excise, Nagpur, wherein Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original No. 157/REF/ST/MT/12-13 dated 11/1/2013 and rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant is exporter of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owever refund in respect of Business Support Service, Clearing and Forwarding Service, Bank and Financial Services were rejected by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by the said order the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who upheld the order in original and rejected the appeal of the appellant therefore the appellant is before me. 3. Shri. Vinay Jain Ld. C. A. for the appellant submits that three services on which the refund rejected are business support service, clear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nal authority rejected the claim on the ground that services is of loading and unloading of export goods which is not clearing and forwarding service therefore the same is not admissible for refund. It is his submission that services were provided by clearing and forwarding service agent, it is service of clearing and forwarding which is covered under the Notification No. 52/11 and the same should be allowed. Regarding the banking and financial services, he submits that Ld. Commissioner (Appeals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n which refund was claimed is related to collection of export proceeds, purchase of foreign exchange, which are squarely covered by the entry provided at Sr. No. 12 of the table of the Notification No. 52/11 ST, therefore they are entitled for the refund on banking and financial services. He further submits that they have initially filed refund claim under Notification No. 41/12-ST but after pointed out by the department they amended their claim under Notification No. 52/11-ST however the claim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He further submits that export has taken place prior to issuance of Notification No. 41/2012-ST therefore the refund of the Appellant is covered by earlier Notification No. 52/2011-ST therefore the Notification No. 41/2012-ST cannot be applied for the refund in the present case. He also submits that since the appellant themselves corrected their refund claim by giving effect to claim under Notification No. 52/2011, so their claim does not re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fication, hence the refund is not admissible. As regard the banking and financial services he fairly concedes that entry of banking and financial service covered under the clause (zm) of Sr. 12 of the Notification. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 6. I find that export against which the refund was sought for during the period when the Notification No. 52/2011-ST was inforce, though the refund claim was filed after supersession of that noti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ication No. 52/2011-ST, therefore refund on business support service is not admissible. However as per the submission of the Ld. Counsel that service description reveals that it is a service of DOC Handing correctly classified clearing and forwarding services or cargo handling services and both the services are covered under Notification No. 52/2011, therefore refund is admissible. I find that from the invoices it cannot be ascertained whether this services are of business support services or ot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version