9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the facts of the case are that the respondent is registered since 12.06.2008 for rendering various taxable services. The respondent-assessee filed three refund claims under Notification No. 5/2006-CE dated 14.03.2006 claiming refund of unutilized cenvat credit which was taken on input services utilized for export of taxable services. The details of the claim filed by the assessee are given below: Sl. No. OIO No. Refund Amt. Claim period 1 04/2010 Rs. 52,16,278/- 07/08 09/08 2 447/2010 Rs. 99,12,750/- 10/08 03/09 3 787/2010 Rs. 93,38,399/- 04/09 09/09 By following the due process of issue of show-cause notice, the claims were disposed off vide Order-in-Original dated 29.12.2010 wherein the claims were r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovided from India and used outside India and payment of such service is received in convertible Foreign Exchange, then only such service is treated as Export of Service. He further submitted that this condition has not been satisfied by the assessee inasmuch as the service was provided and used in India. The assessee is merely engaged in providing services to the foreign company and such services are rendered in India only. Thereby such taxable services are originating and are concluded in India and therefore are consumed in India. The mere fact that the assessee is receiving the consideration in foreign currency alone cannot determine the nature of taxable services. He further submitted that as per the Customs Act 1962 which defines Expor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia. The learned Advocate strongly argued that the understanding of the lower authority is not correct, the services have rightly been delivered abroad and they have been used by the Singapore Company. They relied on several case laws. They also stated that it should not be considered that the appellant and the company in Singapore are related, even though one is a subsidiary of the other, they are separate legal entities. They produced a large number of case laws on this subject. They also relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Blue Star v. CCE vide Final Order No. 489/2008 dated 27-3-2008 (2008-TIOL-716-CESTAT-BANG), wherein a similar situation was dealt with. The situation here also is similar. In this case, the Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of Export of Services Rules, 2005 held accordingly." 4.1. The learned counsel for the assessee further relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Paul Merchants Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2013 (29) S.T.R. 257 (Tri.-Del.) and also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Microsoft Corporation (I) (P) Ltd. Vs. CST, New Delhi reported in 2014 (36) S.T.R. 766 (Tri.-Del.) and submitted that this issue is no more res integra as held in the two decisions cited supra. 5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned AR and the counsel for the respondent and have also perused the material on record and the judgments cited at the bar. After considering the material, we find that the issue is squarely cov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
