Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mahindra Reva Electric Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Reva Electric Car Co. Pvt. Ltd.) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore - I

2016 (6) TMI 410 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Payment of service tax to the CHA and Courier Agency for export of finished goods - refund of service tax in terms of Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 as amended vide Notification No. 17/2008-ST dated 19.02.2008 rejected - Held that:- After going through the details given by the appellant along with the certificates of the CHA, find that the appellant has furnished sufficient details which if examined can establish the link proving to the fact of export of goods by the said CHA. This .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

13/2011, E/914/2011-SM - Final Order Nos. 20366-20367/ 2016 - Dated:- 27-5-2016 - SHRI S.S. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Petitioner : Shri Anirudha Naik, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Mohd. Yusuf, AR ORDER PER: S.S. GARG The appellant has filed these two appeals against the Order-in-Appeal dated 31.12.2010. Since in both the appeals identical issue is involved and impugned order is one, therefore both the appeals are being disposed of by this order. These appeals are directed against the o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by Notification 6/2008-CE dated 01.03.2008. The appellants are availing the facility of cenvat credit on inputs, input services and capital goods under Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. Appellant filed two applications for refund of service tax in terms of Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 as amended vide Notification No. 17/2008-ST dated 19.02.2008 for the quarter as detailed below: Sl. No. Refund filed for the Quarter Amount claimed (in Rs.) Order-in-Original Amount Sanctioned/Rejected ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Notification 41/2007 inasmuch as they do not contain any of the particulars mentioned in the Notification and also for failure to produce any evidence to link the use of the said services in relation to export of goods. Further with reference to the service tax refund of ₹ 79,632/- (Rupees Seventy Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty Two only) claimed by the appellant for the quarter October 2008 to December 2008, an amount of ₹ 13,448/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Four Hundred an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the invoices not containing the details as mentioned in Notification No. 41/2007 is only a procedural formality to be complied with whereas the substantial condition i.e. export of goods has taken place and the documents evidencing the said transactions were also submitted before the lower authorities and further the appellant furnished a certificate obtained from M/s. Sea-Air Logistics (I) Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Radius furnishing all the require .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant further submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the learned Commissioner has not applied her mind independently and simply followed the order of Assistant Commissioner and without considering the case laws cited by the appellant. He further submitted that it is undisputed that during the relevant period i.e. July 2008 to September 2008 the appellant has paid service tax in respect of services of CHA as well as Courier Agency in relation to export of finished g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e of courier, destination of the courier including the name and address of the recipient of the courier and the exporter did not produce evidence to link the use of the Courier Service to export goods and further in relation to CHA refund was denied on account of non-fulfillment of the conditions specified in Notification 41/2007. On the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings in the impugned order and submitted that the appellant failed to fulfill the conditions of the Notification an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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