9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncy Service', for which they are registered with the Central Excise Department. Since the services are exported, during the period from April to Sept, 2015, they have filed 7 quarterly refund claims totalling to Rs. 43,09,934/- claiming refund of Service Tax paid on various input services used in providing taxable output service under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.6.2012. On scrutiny of the said quarterly refund claims, discrepancies were noticed and communicated to the appellant, accordingly. On the basis of the statements made by the appellant, the adjudicating authority sanctioned the total claim of Rs. 34,58,451/- and rejected the balance amount. The Revenue filed an appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is within India, since the service provider is situated within India, accordingly the services rendered by the appellant is not an export service. It is his contention that neither they are providing Online Information and Database Access Retrieval service nor act as an intermediary, hence Rule 9 of the Place of Provisions of Service Rules, 2012 cannot be made applicable to their case. It is his submissions that the facts in the present case satisfy Rule 3 of the Place of Provisions of Service Rules, 2012, inasmuch as services provided by the appellant relates to Development and Maintenance of Software for the foreign entity, hence the place of provision of service is the location of the recipient of service. In support, the learned Advoca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ftware supplied to the foreign client. There is no allegation of the Department that any data stored outside India have been retrieved or used by the appellant so as to qualify or fall under the category of Online Information and Database Access or Retrieval Service prescribed under Rule 9(b) of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. Also their case cannot be called as intermediary service as prescribed in the definition of 'intermediary' under Rule 2(f) of Place of Provisions of Service Rules, 2012, which reads as follows:- "(f) "intermediary" means a broker, an agent or any other person, by whatever name called, who arranges or facilitates a provision of a service (hereinafter called the 'main' service) or a suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
