TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant. - Appeal No.ST/60392/2019-ST (SM) - FINAL ORDER NO.60927/2019 - Dated:- 6-11-2019 - Hon ble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Present for the Appellant: Shri Varun Gaba, Advocate And Shri Anmol Gupta, CA Present for the Respondent: Shri A.K. Saini, AR ORDER PER: ASHOK JINDAL The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.27/2012-ST dt.18.6.2012. 2. The facts of the case are not in dispute. The appellant has availed input services for export of the goods. The appellant filed refund claim under Rule 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice Tax Rules, 2004, it assumed that the output services qualified to be export of services. Accordingly, in order to avail input services and CENVAT Credit of Service Tax, it made applications for refund of Service Tax and Krishi Kalyan Cess paid on input services under Rule 5 ibid and also took shelter under Notification No. 27/2012-C.E.(N.T.) dated 18.06.2012 (for the periods from January 2017 to March 2017 and April 2017 to June 2017). 3.2 The Adjudicating Authority vide Orders-in-Original dated 28.03.2018 and 16.04.2018, after considering the explanation of the appellant, however, rejected the refund claims inter alia on the grounds that the assessee had not fulfilled the primary condition of debiting equal amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turns itself was done away with. 8. I also note that the Board has clarified the above position in its Circular No. 58/32/2018-G.S.T. (supra) and I also note that more or less the same view is expressed in all the orders relied on by the Ld. Advocate for the appellant. 9. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the denial of refund is not in accordance with law and hence, the impugned orders cannot sustain. The same are set aside. 6. As the facts in hand are similar to the facts in the case of Global Analytics India Pvt.Ltd. (supra), therefore, following the precedent decision, I hold that the refund claim cannot be denied to the appellant. Therefore, the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
