Commissioner of GST & CE Chennai North Versus Southerland Global Service Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2019 (1) TMI 1429 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 12-11-2018
Appeal Nos. ST/105-109/2012, ST/111/2012 – FINAL ORDER No. 43084-43089/2018
Service Tax
Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial)
Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) For the Appellant
Ms. Radhika Chandrasekhar, Advocate For the Respondent
ORDER
Per Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar
In these appeals, the common facts are that respondents herein are exporters of taxable service, namely, called call centre service and technical support service under the category of Business Auxiliary Service (BAS). The respondents had filed refund claims towards unutilized cenvat credit taken on rendering export of service under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit rules, 2004 read with Notification No.5/2006-CE (NT) DT. 14.3.2006. The refund claims were partially rejected by the original auth
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
entitled for refund of unutilized cenvat credit on inputs used in or in relation to services provided to SEZ units. The term 'export' under SEZ Act is a deeming provision meant exclusively for benefit of “SEZ units” only and DTA units cannot claim any complementary benefit based on deeming of SEZ Act / Rules by mere supply of goods to SEZ units. ‚Export turnover‛ in the formula prescribed under Notification No.5/2006 for arriving at the proportionate credit will not include the value of service provided to SEZ units.
3. Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of Revenue, Ld. A.R Shri A. Cletus reiterated the grounds of departmental appeal.
4. On the other hand, on behalf of the respondent Ms. Radhika Chandrasekar, Ld. Advocate has submitted as follows :
(i) They are eligible for credit of input services as the same has been availed by them in the course of their business activity.
(ii) The decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Ultra Tech Cement
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ons Vs CCE & ST reported in (2016) 43 STR 576 (Tri.-Chennai) has held that the value of SEZ export should be included in computing export turnover. In the said case the value of exports made from SEZ was not included in the export turnover portion in the formula prescribed under Rule 5 of CCR.
5. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts.
6. We find that both the issues in dispute are no longer res integra. The services like Event Management , Clearing & Forwarding Agency service, Insurance service etc. have been held, by various appellate forums, to be very much eligible input services for the purpose of 2(l) of the CCR 2004. So also, it has been consistently held that value of SEZ exports should be included in computing the export turnover for the purpose of working out the quantum of refund in Rule 5 of the CCR 2004. Ld. Advocate has correctly relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in Cognizant Technology Solutions (supra) which inter alia, held that the exclusion of SEZ
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =