TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure is not to export the domestic taxes and to encourage export. Therefore, the services have been utilized in the course of export business of the appellant and accordingly, the appellant is entitled for refund. - decided in favour of appellant - Appeal No. ST/35 to 38/11 - Final Order No. A/660-663/2015-WZB/SMB - Dated:- 20-3-2015 - SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Anil Balani, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) ORDER PER: SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY The appellant, M/s K. Prashant Enterprises, manufacturer and exporter of readymade garments, is in appeal against a common Order-in-Appeal No. RBT/29 to 32/2010 dated 30.9.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant being an exporter is entitled to exemption of Service Tax paid on the specified input services utilized by it in the course of its export business as provided under Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007. Accordingly for the year 2008, the appellant filed 4 quarterly claims for refund of Service Tax paid by them on taxable services utilized in the business of export ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as the supersession of the notification was also done. The departmental clarification was issued on 17.4.2008, 12.5.2008, 11.12.2008 and 12.3.2008, Notification No. 41/07 was in operation till 6.7.2009 and was superseded by Notification No. 17/09-ST dated 7.7.2009. The said notification is claimed by the department, in its Clarificatory Circular dated 6.7.2009 as revamp of the entire scheme with the object of achieving speedy refunds to exporters. The major departure from the original scheme was that the refund was now to be granted on self certification/certification by Chartered Accountant. Accordingly, the departmental clarifications issued earlier to Notification No. 17/2009 are also applicable to refund. W.e.f. 3.1.2012, Notification No. 17/09 has been superseded by Notification No. 52/2011 dated 30.12.2011. Thus, the basic criteria for exemption of Service Tax for exporters are : - (i) Services to be specified under the Notification, (ii) Exporter of goods should be registered with Export Promotion Council and Exporters having Import Export Code, (iii) Exporter of the goods have paid the Service Tax thereon to the provider of taxable service. (iv) Suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same is not allowable as the CHA service was inserted/modified by Notification No. 17/2008 dated 1.4.2008. It was further observed that on scrutiny of the plea for remaining three quarters, the description of goods exported by the appellant does not appear on the CHA invoice/bill as required in the conditions laid down for exemption. Accordingly, it was held that the appellant is not entitled for refund of Service Tax in respect of CHA service. 3.6 As regards the Storage and Warehouse service, the disallowance was confirmed as the learned Commissioner (Appeals) failed to take into notice the subsequent clarifications and dilution of conditions vide clarification dated 12.3.2009 and Notification No. 52/2011. 3.7 In respect of Courier Service, it has been held that the appellant have failed to establish the relationship of service with the goods exported and also in the absence of IEC Code not mentioned in the invoice. Accordingly, the finding of the Assistant Commissioner was upheld. Being aggrieved, the appellant have preferred this appeal before this Tribunal. 3.8 The appellant vehemently argued that in view of the law, time to time clarification issued and clarified by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncy gives all the details save and except the IEC Code no. of exporter and there is no dispute with regard to the holding of IEC code with importer, the refund cannot be denied. The appellant also relies on the ruling in the case of Parameswari Textiles Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Tiruchirapalli - 2011 (22) STR 625 (Tri-Chennai), wherein refund of service tax being technical testing and analysis was in question under Notification No. 41/07, this Tribunal observed that the export goods have been got tested, as to the specification which was requirement for acceptance of goods by the buyer in Sweden and accordingly, it was held that relation is established between the services availed and export of goods and in view of the policy of the government, not to burden exports with domestic taxes, refund was held to be allowable. 4. The learned AR relies on the impugned order. The learned AR further relies on the Division Bench ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Magsons Exports Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi - 2013 (32) STR 22 (Tri-Del), wherein in the case of manufacturer exporter of readymade garments, who claimed benefit under Notification No. 17/2009 and applied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
