9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on freight amounting to Rs. 3,51,199/- for the period prior to 30.06.2017. The appellant in response to the audit objection deposited the amount on 09.03.2018 vide service tax challan Rs. 3,76,284/- (including cess) plus Rs. 41,599/- towards interest. 3. On being advised that as the appellant has already paid customs duty, CVD etc. on the import price which includes freight, the appellant was not required to pay service tax again on the freight (under reverse charge). Accordingly, appellant filed the refund application on 06.04.2018, praying for refund of the amount of tax with interest paid. 4. Show cause notice dated 11.06.2018 was issued as the appellant deposited the tax with interest towards settlement of audit para and further the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in non taxable territory to a person located in taxable territory, by way of transportation of goods from a place outside India upto customs station in India. It was further observed vide Notification No. 3/2017 read with Notification No. 15/2017, importer was liable to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism, by amending Notification No. 30/2012-ST. The tax deposited related to the period April, 2017 to June, 2017. It is further observed, that the appellant while admitting liability to service tax, have preferred the refund claim, only on the ground that cenvat credit is not available to them, in view of the provisions of Section 142(8) of CGST Act, 2017. It is further observed that the appellant have not submitted supporting doc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngwith interest deposited. 10. Learned Authorised Representative appearing for the Revenue relies on the impugned order. 11. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the transaction value for Custom duty and Excise duty (CVD), includes the ocean freight, and accordingly I hold that the appellant has suffered the double taxation, by again paying the service tax on the ocean freight as demanded by the Revenue. 12. Accordingly, in view of my findings, I allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order. I further hold that the appellant is entitled to refund of service tax amounting to Rs. 3,51,199/- plus the amount of interest deposited Rs. 41,599/-, and /or the total the amount of Rs. 3,92,798/-. This amount should be refunde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
