9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are that the appellant is a 100% Software EOU, registered under the Software Technology Park scheme of Government of India for export of services. The appellant, during the relevant period from April 2007 to May 2008, had discharged service tax under reverse charge mechanism in terms of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 in respect of the services received from M/s. Texas Instruments Inc., USA viz. Management of Business Consultancy Service, Management, Maintenance and Repair Service, Information Technology Software Service (ITSS) (June 2008 onwards), Management Consultancy Service (June 2008 onwards) and availed cenvat credit amounting to Rs.14,06,03,251/-. Alleging that the output services provided by the appellant viz. ITSS till 15.05. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax on the domestic services under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 and services received from outside India under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 2(l)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The total amount of Rs.14,06,03,251/- was paid as service tax on input services, which they availed cenvat credit. 3.2. She has submitted that during the period April 2007 to May 2008, the appellant had filed four refund claims for the quarters April to June 2007, July 2007 to December 2007, January 2008 to March 2008 and April 2008 to May 2008 for claiming the accumulated cenvat credit in terms of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The said refund claims were rejected by the Department solely on the ground that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue and settled it in appellant's favour by upholding that the refund of credit cannot be rejected on the ground that the output services provided by the appellant being ITSS were not taxable during the relevant period. She has submitted that the refund has already been sanctioned to the appellant and the issue of eligibility of credit has already been put to test; therefore the credit of Rs.14,06,03,251/- is admissible and the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Further, in support of her contention, she has referred to the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the following cases:- i. Kyocera Wireless Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CST, Bangalore [2014(9) TMI 1036 - CESTAT BANGALORE] ii. Kyocera Wireless (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CST, Bangalore [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pril 2007 to May 2008. Under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Initially the said refund claims were rejected on the ground that the output services provided by them became taxable only w.e.f. 16.05.2008; hence the cenvat credit availed itself is inadmissible. 8. From the records and submissions, we find that the matter has reached this Tribunal and this Tribunal following the ratio laid down in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions (supra), remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration. In the de novo proceeding, the adjudicating authority allowed the cash refund claims for the period April 2007 to May 2008. In such circumstances, the demand which arose consequent to the rejection of the refund, in o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
