TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ogy Park of India, Hyderabad. They provided various services to M/s. Deloitte Tax LLP in USA like back office services and other assistance such as lead tax services, international assignment services, tax services etc. According to the Respondents, these services were covered under Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) and Management Consultancy Services . They had also got themselves registered under the Service Tax Authority. The issue here is that the Respondent received various input services on which they had paid appropriate Service Tax, on which they availed the input Service Tax credit. According to them these input services were used in relation to providing the output service which is the Business Auxiliary service (BAS). Since the output service has been exported, they applied for refund of ₹ 8,57,241/- on 31.3.2006 for the period from May 2005 to February 2006 under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Notification No.5/2006 CE (NP) dated 14.3.2006 issued under Rule 5 ibid. The lower authority rejected the refund claim mainly on the ground that the output service or the services rendered by the Respondent to the party in USA does not amount to BAS and they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... velopment. The description of the services to be provided by the Respondent to the party in USA reads as follows: Exhibit - A Description of Services In connection with the Deloitte Tax's business and engagements, Deloitte Tax India will provide preparation and consulting services and back office and technology support as requested by Deloitte Tax for the activities of Deloitte Tax, especially in providing assistance to Deloitte tax with respect to continued support for Deloitte Tax's clients and the design, implementation and upgrade of various Deloitte Tax programme. The services to be provided by Deloitte Tax India to Deloitte Tax under this agreement may include data entry, data processing, and such other incidental and support services as may be requested by Deloitte Tax for preparation and filing of US Federal, State and local tax returns, and property tax returns, as well as for computing advance tax estimates, wage card processing, and transfer pricing planning and execution. On going through the services to be provided by the Respondent to the party in America it is very clearly seen that these services do not relate to Information Technology Servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e available. 5.2 Further, one of the grounds in appeal memo by the Revenue is that the various input services have no nexus with the output services provided by the Respondent. The definition of Input Service is reproduced herein below. Input service means any service - (i) used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service, or (ii) used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal. and includes services used in relation to setting up, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory, premises of provider of output service or an office relating to such factory or premises, advertisement or sales promotion, market research, storage upto the place of removal, procurement of inputs, activities relating to business, such as accounting, auditing, financing, recruitment and quality control, coaching and training, computer networking, credit rating, share registry, and security, inward transportation of inputs or capital goods and outward transportation upto the place of removal: On going through the definition, we find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to the refunds relating to the period prior to 14.3.2006. In other words, when the refund claim is made and if the Rule as amended in operation, then the refund cannot be denied on the ground that the refund pertains to an earlier period. In the present case, the refund claim was filed on 31.3.2006 which is after 14.3.2006 and the only reason given in the adjudication for rejection of the claim is that it pertains to the year prior to 14.3.2006. In view of the decision of the Mumbai Bench, this objection cannot be sustained. It has also been observed that statute cannot be treated retrospective merely because it relates to the past action. A statute which takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under existing laws, or creates a new obligation or imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect of transaction already past, alone is called a retrospective legislation. It was also pointed out by the learned advocate that the suggestion that Rule amended on 14.3.2006 will be applicable only to goods or services exported after 14.3.2006 is not sustainable. This is precisely the contention raised by the assessee in Mysore Rolling reported at 1987 (28) ELT 50 (SC) with r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
