2018 (12) TMI 865 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – Refund claim – export of services – Rule 5 of the Cenvat Rules read with the provisions of Notification No. 27/2012- CE(NT) dated 18-06-2012 – denial on account of nexus.
–
Held that:- The transaction undertaken by the appellants qualified to be “export of service”, as defined under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Since they were not in a position to utilize the accumulated Cenvat Credit, refund claim has been filed in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with the provisions of Notification No.27/2012 CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012.
–
Some of the input services do not qualify the definition of input services in terms of Rule 2 (e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 – Held that:- Tribunal in various decisions has consistently held that there cannot be two different yardsticks, one for permitting credit and the other for eligibility for granting rebate. Whatever credit has been permitted to be taken, the same are permitted
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
I), Kolkata. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in exporting taxable output service namely, Information Technology Software Service . For providing the service, exported outside the country, the appellant availed various input services, defined under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (hereafter referred to as the Cenvat Rules , in short). The services provided by them being qualified as Export of Service , as defined under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 (hereafter referred to as the Rules , in short), the appellant filed Refund Claim in terms of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Rules read with the provisions of Notification No. 27/2012- CE(NT) dated 18-06-2012 during the period from April, 2014 to June, 2014. 3. The grounds for disallowance of credit in respect of all the three adjudication Orders as well as Orders-in-Appeal are summarized in the following Table:- Sl. No. Name of the Service Provider Nature of Service Inadmissible CENVAT Cr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s. 4. AT & T Global Network Services India Pvt. Ltd. Internet telecommunication Service 2,84,664 Service receiver s address in input invoice does not match The invoices are in the name of appellant themselves and the receipt of services has not been challenged so the same credit may be allowed Refer Case law of DHL Logistics Vs. Commr. Of Central Excise. (CESTAT.- Mumbai) 5. Kochhar & Co Legal Consultancy Service 15,061.60 Does Not have relation or nexus to export of service Refer 2014 (33) STR 96 (Tri.-del.)- KPMG Vs. CCE, New Delhi, 2018- TIOL- 2451- CESTAT-MUM Accelya Kale Sol Ltd. Vs. Commr. Of CGST, 2018-TIOL- 2443-CESTATMUM- Visteon Technical and Services Center Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Commr. Of CGST 6. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Chartered Accountant Service 9,270.00 Does not have relation or nexus to export of service Refer 2014 (33) STR 96 (Tri.-del.)- KPMG Vs. CCE, New Delhi, 2018- TIOL- 2451- CESTAT-MUM Accelya Kale Sol Ltd. Vs. Commr. Of CGST, 2018-TIOL- 2443-CESTATMUM- Vist
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
les, 1994. Since they were not in a position to utilize the accumulated Cenvat Credit, refund claim has been filed in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with the provisions of Notification No.27/2012 CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012. The present dispute is on disallowance of such refund claim under various heads on the ground of lack of nexus/co-relation between the input service and the out-put service. I find that in the present case, some of the input services do not qualify the definition of input services in terms of Rule 2 (e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. I find that the Tribunal in various decisions has consistently held that there cannot be two different yardsticks, one for permitting credit and the other for eligibility for granting rebate. Whatever credit has been permitted to be taken, the same are permitted to be utilized and when the same is not possible, there is provision for grant of refund or rebate. Without questioning the credit taken, the eligibility to
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =