9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant filed refund claim of the services availed for the export of the goods. The refund claim was rejected on various grounds. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 4. The refund claim was rejected on the following grounds: (a) Classification of services was not found to be mentioned in some of the invoices for which refund claim is made. (b) The invoices in respect of Terminal Handling Charges and Bill of Lading charges were covered of which were not classifiable under sub clause 65(105)(zzzq) of Finance Act, 1994. The same has not covered under the said notification. (c) The claim of the services incurred under sub clause 65 (105) (zzI) for the services of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat falls for consideration is regarding refund of the services tax paid by the service providers for the services rendered by them to appellant. It is the case of the appellant that they have availed Cenvat Credit of the service tax paid under the category of port services on documentation charge, terminal handling charge, surrender charges and utilise the same exporting the finished goods manufactured by them. It is the case of the Revenue that during the relevant period refund provision were not permitting for refund of the service tax paid on documentation charge, terminal handling charge and surrender charges. On deeper consideration, we find that both the lower authorities have come to an erroneous conclusion, in as much as there is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the service provider for such exports. It is also not in dispute that appellant is eligible for the refund of the amount of service tax paid by the service providers. The dispute is regarding whether the appellant can get the refund of the amount having filed the refund claim on 31.03.2009 instead of 30.09.2008. We find that the first appellate authority has correctly recorded the fact that it is settled principle as to Rules and Notifications are issued from time to time to supplement the provisions of main Act and grant of relief of refund of service tax paid on services used in export of goods has to be sanctioned to the respondent when conditions prescribed in the main Act are fulfilled. We also find strong force in the submissions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, the assessee would be eligible for the benefit of refund, subject to satisfaction of other conditions stipulated in the Notification. 6. Following the above decisions, I hold that, in the present case also, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of refund claim filed under Notification No. 41/2007 as amended by Notification No. 17/2007 and the time bar aspect is not attracted. However, the appellant has to satisfy that they have fulfilled the other conditions stipulated in the Notification. Therefore, the matter is remanded back to the original adjudicating authority only for satisfying that the appellant has fulfilled the other terms and conditions stipulated in Notification No. 41/2007 and the time bar issue will have no applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
