TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f services exported, the relevant date for computation of the period of one year is the date of realization of the foreign exchange and not the date of invoice. Following the said decision, this issue answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department. Rejection on the ground that error in computation of the total eligible credit - HELD THAT:- It is seen that the assessee is discharging Service Tax under Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Services as the recipient of service under reverse charge mechanism. This cannot be considered as the domestic turnover. While applying the formula, the output service provided by the assessee in the domestic area has to be considered. The quantum of domestic turnover in regard to renting of immovable property would be only Rs.39,85,984/-. On the basis of records, this issue is found to be in favor of the assessee and against the Department. However, the same requires to be remanded to the original authority for recalculation by applying the correct domestic turnover. Rejection of refund in respect of various services alleging that these services have no nexus with the output services provided by the assessee - period prior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akshmi Ganeshram, Superintendent / A.R. ORDER The issue involved in both these appeals being connected, they were heard together and disposed of by this common order. The parties hereby are referred to as assessee and Department for the sake of convenience. 2. Brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in providing taxable services viz., Commercial training and coaching, Erection Commission and Installation, Maintenance or repair Services, Information Technology Service and Business auxiliary Services . They had filed refund claims for refund of input service tax credit for different periods under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, in regard to the export of their output service. After due process of law, the original authority sanctioned certain amount and rejected the refund in respect of certain services. Against this, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who sanctioned refund of Rs.56,24,820/-. The Department has filed the appeal against sanction of Rs.56,24,820/- and the assessee has filed appeal against the rejection of Rs.2,79,52,371/- by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3.1 The Ld. Consultant Shri K. Sivarajan appeared for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turnover in regard to the Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service is for payment of Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism as a recipient of service only. The authorities below while computing the eligible refund ought to have considered the value of output service in regard to renting of immovable property only and not manpower recruitment and supply agency services. 3.4 The third issue is the rejection of refund claim in respect of various services alleging that these services have no nexus with the output services provided by assessee. An amount of Rs.8,90,762/- has been rejected by the authorities below in regard to outdoor catering services, rent-a-cab services, event management services, travel agent services and supply of tangible goods services alleging that these services have no nexus with the output services provided by the assessee. The Ld. Consultant submitted that the period involved is prior to 01.04.2011 during which period, the definition of input services had a wide ambit as it included the words activities relating to business . For the different period in the assessee s own cases, the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the refund in respect of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he amount of Rs.1,42,37,627/- which is appealed by the assessee on the ground that the amount of domestic turnover applied in the formula is erroneous, the Ld. AR submitted that the matter requires to be re-looked by the authorities below. 4.3 The Ld. AR argued that the credit availed in respect of outdoor catering services, custom house agency services, insurance services, rent-a-cab services, travel agent services, supply of tangible goods services, management consultant services, business support services, management, maintenance and repair services availed by the assessee is ineligible. The Commissioner (Appeals) ought not to have allowed the credit in respect of these services as they have no nexus with the output services provided by the assessee. 4.4 The Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed an amount of Rs.7,19,638/-. The Ld. Consultant for the assessee has explained the contentions in regard to an amount of Rs.7,19,638/- which is discussed in paragraph 9(vii) of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal Nos. 132-134/2014 dated 14.03.2014. It is submitted by the Ld. Authorised Representative that the original authority had disallowed the refun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15-Oct-09 1,08,76,250 4 HYIDI09011 28-Oct-09 14,28,39,673 5 CHHDI09007 15-Oct-09 1,26,76,964 6 CHSPI09004 28-Oct-09 6,49,512 7 CHDSI09012 28-Oct-09 3,51,994 8 HYDSI09008 28-Oct-09 6,78,846 Total 42,93,92,219/- 6.3 It can be seen from the above table that the authorities below have computed the period of one year form the date of invoice. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that in the case of refund in respect of services exported, the relevant date for computation of the period of one year is the date of realization of the foreign exchange and not the date of invoice. Following the said decision, we answer this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fourth issue is the wrong application of formula for calculating the eligible refund. It is pointed out by the Ld. Consultant that in the period of October 2009, the assessee had availed total credit of Rs.5,82,75,522/-. During the said period, they had debited an amount of Rs.5,07,018/- being the refund sanctioned for an earlier period. While calculating the refund, the authorities below have deducted this amount of Rs.5,07,018/- instead of applying the total input credit availed by the assessee. We find that the contention of the assessee is correct. The total input credit availed by the assessee which is Rs.5,82,75,522/- has to be taken for calculating the eligible refund. This issue is found in favor of the assessee and against the Department. However, the issue requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority for calculating the correct eligible refund. 6.7 The Ld. AR has submitted that an amount of Rs.7,19,638/- has been allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and that assessee is not eligible for the same. The said amount was rejected by the original authority for the reason that the credit has been availed after the last date of export. The Commissioner (Appeals) all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
