2019 (2) TMI 15 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Refund of service tax paid – input services – export of service – POPOS Rules – Providing “Business Support Service” and “Management or Business Consultants Service” – Held that:- The destination of provision of service is to be considered on the basis of the place of consumption and not on the basis of place of performance of service – the services provided by the respondent is to be categorized as service falling under Rule 3(1)(iii) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005.
–
The issue arising out of the present dispute is no more res integra in view of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Paul Merchants Ltd. v CCE, Chandigarh [2012 (12) TMI 424 – CESTAT, DELHI (LB)], wherein it has been h
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
roviding Business Support Service and Management or Business Consultants Service and for that purpose, is registered with the jurisdictional Service Tax Department, having Service Tax Registration No. AAACW5943MST001. During the disputed period, the respondent had filed refund applications, claiming refund of service tax paid on input services, which were used / utilized for exportation of output services. The refund applications were filed under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The original authority had rejected the refund claim amounting to ₹ 46,24,267/-on the ground that during the period October 2009 to February 2010, the services provided by the respondent cannot be termed as export of service , in terms of Export of Ser
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
in denying the Cenvat benefit. Revenue has assailed the impugned order on the ground that allowing the refund benefit on the export of service by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is not proper and justified. Through this appeal, Revenue has contended that since the services were provided in relation to selection of potential representative, advertisement, publicity etc., which were ultimately used for investment in India, such services cannot be considered as export of service in terms of Rule 3 of the Export of Services Rules, 2005. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. In support of consideration of the disputed service as export, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 20.12.2017 has held that the destina
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =