TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that the said documents clearly indicate service tax registration number of Mumbai Port Trust and service tax amount discharged under the head “Port Services”. In our considered view, there being no dispute as to the facts that services were utilized by the appellant for export of goods, rejection refund of such an amount is incorrect. Secondly, we find both the lower authorities recording that appellant should have produced evidence as to payment of service tax liability by the service provider to the government of India is a non-starter and curious findings. We find on careful reading of notification no. 41/2007-ST dated 06 Oct. 2007, it does not indicate that the refund claim is to be evidenced by producing information of the servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant would draw attention to the factual matrix of the case and findings recorded by both the lower authorities. He would submit that the both lower authorities are insisting upon evidence of payment of service tax liability by the service provider while notification does not impose any such condition. He would take us through the notification no. 41/2007-ST dated 6 Oct 2007. 4. Learned departmental representative on the other hand drew our attention to the findings recorded by the lower authorities and submits that the documentary evidences of discharge of service tax liability are not correct document as envisaged in notification no. 41/2007-ST. It is her submission that the evidences produced by the appellants in respect of chalans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant for export of goods, rejection refund of such an amount is incorrect. Secondly, we find both the lower authorities recording that appellant should have produced evidence as to payment of service tax liability by the service provider to the government of India is a non-starter and curious findings. We find on careful reading of notification no. 41/2007-ST dated 06 Oct. 2007, it does not indicate that the refund claim is to be evidenced by producing information of the service provider having discharged the service tax liability. After going various clause (f) we find that the only evidence required is payment of service tax on the specified services which in our view, is satisfied in this case by showing that the invoices which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
