New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Gujarat Ambuja Export Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise Amravati

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. On this fact the judgment in the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntitled 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 this bill classification of services is not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ndent : 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 soya product such as Soyabeen De-Oiled Ca .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ort 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, clearing and forwarding service, bank and fina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

round 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) rejected the claim of this service stat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 can be processed under earlier Notificati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pugned 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 remain under Notification No. 41/2012, ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ble. 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 notification. I also observed that appellant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 otherwise. It is also to be seen that under .....

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