Tribunal grants appeal, allows refund of service tax for IT services exported from registered premises.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal that revised the refund claim of service tax. It was found that the services for which the refund was claimed were indeed received in the registered premises of the appellant, making them eligible for Cenvat credit and refund of unutilized service tax paid. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had provided IT services that were exported from their registered premises, thus justifying their claim for refund. The impugned order was deemed unsustainable and overturned by the Tribunal, granting the appellant consequential relief.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Appeal regarding revision of refund claim of service tax on the ground of services not received in registered premises.

Analysis:
The appeal was brought against Order-in-Appeal No. PIII/RS/ 256/2011, dated 14-9-2011. Despite the absence of the appellant, the appeal was taken up for the third time. The Departmental Representative was heard, and the records were examined. The appeal focused on the revision of a refund claim of Rs. 2,06,896 based on the argument that the services for which the refund was claimed were not received in the registered premises of the appellant. Both lower authorities concluded that the services for which Cenvat credit was availed were received at premises not registered with the department, and the appellant failed to prove that the activities were related to the output services.

It was noted that the appellant provided IT services that were exported, making them eligible to claim Cenvat credit and refund of unutilized service tax paid. The dispute centered on whether the services were rendered in premises not granted registration to the appellant. The Tribunal found that the services for which Cenvat credit was availed were input services for the output services provided by the appellant, specifically IT-enabled services. The appellant had stated before lower authorities that the output services were from their registered premises with a centralized accounting system. The appellant had also registered or added addresses from where services were received for export services, indicating eligibility for input service credit and refund of unutilized amount.

Considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal deemed the impugned order unsustainable and set it aside to the extent contested before the Tribunal. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any, as the impugned order was set aside.

---