9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r provision in para 3 of Notification No.41/2012-ST, dated 29.06.2012 is given below:- Sl. No. Date of filing Period Amount claimed (Rs.) Amount Sanctioned (Rs.) 01 29.06.2016 Jan.'16 to Mar.'16 25,70,596 6,10,886 02 09.12.2016 Apr.'16 to Jun.'16 20,32,203 5,61,357 03 29.03.2017 Jul.16 to Sept.'16 21,07,594 6,06,549 3. After due process of law, the department rejected the rebate claims partially as given in the table above against which appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order upheld the rejection. Hence this appeal. 4. On behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel Shri Sai Prasanth, first argued the issue of jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en used beyond the place of removal for the export of goods." Later, the said notification was amended and vide amendment Notification No.1/2016-ST, dated 03.02.2016, the definition of "specified services" reads as "taxable services that have been used beyond factory or any other place or premises of production or manufacture and the said goods are for their export." From the amendment, it can be gathered that any services which have been availed at the destination in relation to export of goods would be eligible for grant of rebate. 6. To support his arguments, he relied upon the decision in the case of M/s. Polyplex Corporation Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II reported in 2015 (38) S.T.R.821 (Tri.-Del.). He pointed out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... products and for clearance of final products upto the place of removal. This has been clarified by the Board's Circular No.999/6/2015-Cx., dated 28.02.2015. Since the services have been availed beyond the place of removal, the rejection is legal and proper. 8. Heard both sides. 9. The refund has been rejected alleging that the services have been availed beyond the place of removal. For better appreciation, relevant part of the Notification No.41/2012, prior to amendment is extracted as under:- (A) "specified services" means - (i) in the case of excisable goods, taxable services that have been used beyond the place of removal, for the export of said goods; (ii) in the case of goods other than (i) above, taxable services used fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation of refund. It is also to be said that the intention of the said notification granting refund/rebate is to make the export of goods free from duty and taxes. 12. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Polyplex Corporation Ltd., (supra) has analysed the issue and held as under:- "8. With regard to services, namely, Ocean freight, On-Carriage, and Terminal Handling (Destination), the argument of the learned AR for the Revenue is that services availed by the appellant outside India, they are not entitled to claim refund of Service Tax. To claim refund of Service Tax on services in question provided by the service provider located in India and the service recipient is also located in India. I find that service provider in India was required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reproduced hereinabove). 8. I find strong force in the contentions raised by the learned Counsel that identical issue has been decided by the Delhi Bench in the case of Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (supra) and I reproduce the ratio as in para 8. "8. With regard to services, namely, Ocean freight, On-Carriage and Terminal Handling (Destination), the argument of the learned AR for the Revenue is that services availed by the appellant outside India, they are not entitled to claim refund of Service Tax. To claim refund of service tax on services in question provided by the service provider located in India and the service recipient is also located in India. I find that service provider in India was required to be delivered the goods outside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
