Acceleya Kale Solutions Ltd. Versus Commissioner, CGST, Thane
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 1217 – CESTAT MUMBAI – 2019 (369) E.L.T. 803 (Tri. – Mumbai)
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 5-7-2018
Appeal Nos. ST/86485, 86767, 86770-86772/2018 – ORDER No. A/86913-86917/2018
Service Tax
Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial)
Shri Harish Bindumadhavan, Advocate, and Shri Aakash Sarda, C.A., for appellant
Shri Atul Sharma, Additional Commissioner (AR), for respondent
ORDER
These appeals are directed against the impugned orders dated 12.12.2018, 15.1.2018 and 19.1.2018 passed by the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Appeals), Thane, Mumbai. Since the issue arising out of these appeals is common and identical, the same are taken up for hearing together and a common order is being passed.
2. Denial of cenvat benefit availed by the appellant in respect of service tax paid on taxable services utilized for export of output service is the subject matter of present disputes
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nce, clarifying the statutory provisions that correlation between the input services used for export of service cannot be insisted by the department for grant of service tax refund paid on the input services.
4. On the other hand, the learned AR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submits that since the disputed services were not utilized for providing the output service exported by the appellant, the benefit of refund under the Notification dated 18.6.2012 should not be available. Thus, he submits that the authorities below have rightly denied the cenvat benefit to the appellant.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records.
6. The fact is not under dispute that the appellant provides the entire output services to its overseas clients and none of the output services were provided to the clients within the country. Thus, it cannot be said that the input services, on which refund benefit has been sought, were not utilized for pr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Revenue vide Circular dated 16.3.2012. It has been stated therein that the nexus between the input service used in export of service should not be insisted upon and the benefit of refund should be granted on the basis of ratio of export turnover to total turnover demonstrated by the assessee. The relevant paragraph in the Circular dated 16.3.2012 of TRU is extracted herein below:-
“F. Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004:
F.1 Simplified scheme for refunds:
1. A simplified scheme for refunds is being introduced by substituting the entire Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. The new scheme does not require the kind of correlation that is needed at present between exports and input services used in such exports. Duties or taxes paid on any goods or services that qualify as inputs or input services will be entitled to be refunded in the ratio of the export turnover to total turnover.”
8. Since the department has not specifically objected to the fact of computation of export turnover to the total turnover
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =