TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns has considered the issue of nexus and has held that the professional charges and furniture and fixtures are eligible input service. Time limitation - Held that: - the relevant date for the purpose of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs is received, in cases where refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis - refund cannot be rejected. The present case remanded to the original authority to decide the refund claim of the appellant in view of the law declared by the Tribunal in various decisions cited supra, after examining and verifying various documents which may be produced by the appellant in support of their submis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... em on the input services said to have been used by them for the output services exported during the period from October 2007 to September 2008. A show cause notice was issued as their input services do not have any direct nexus with output service, non-registration in the category of Information Technology Software Services and non-taxability of the Information Technology Service prior to 16.5.2008 i.e., the effective date of taxability on software development service, non-correlation of export invoices with FIRC, non-furnishing of the relevant documents and necessary evidences and on the issue of time bar in respect of filing of refund claim. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund. Aggrieved by the Order of the adjudicating aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant relied upon the decision rendered in the case of Axa Business Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST: 2017 (49) STR 556 (Tri.-Bang.). It is his further submission that the registration is not a pre-requisite for granting of refund and this issue is no longer res integra as held by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST: 2012 (27) STR 134 (Kar.) wherein it was held that exporter is entitled to refund of unutilized credit and the registration with the department is not a pre-requisite for claiming the credit. Learned counsel further submitted that furnishing of CA certificate is not required to file the refund claim in view of the Board s Circular No.120/1/2010 dated 19.1.2000. 6. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit Rules, 2004 specifically allows refund of Cenvat credit availed on inputs or input services which have been used for providing output services which have been exported. There is no condition in the Notification which prescribes that the refund will be allowable only in cases where the output services exported is liable for payment of service tax. Hence we find that such a view taken by the authorities below is without any basis. In any case the Tribunal in the case of KPIT Cummins Infosystems Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2013 (32) S.T.R. 356 (Tri.) held that Cenvat credit for export of exempted service would be available as refund. Further, I find that the rejection of refund claim on the ground of registration is also not sustainable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
