Unutilized CENVAT credit refund for export transport services cannot be denied merely because eligibility was clarified later.

Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit on service tax paid for transport services used in exporting goods could not be denied merely because the service was brought within the refund notification by a later amendment. The relevant consideration was that the input service was used for export and the credit remained unutilized in the CENVAT account. The later notification was treated as expanding the eligible services under the refund scheme, and the timing of export before that notification did not, by itself, defeat the refund claim. The respondent was therefore entitled to the refund.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of unutilized CENVAT credit of service tax paid on transport services used for export of goods could be denied on the ground that the relevant service was specifically brought within the refund notification by a later notification.

Analysis: The refund claim was supported by the fact that the respondent had used the transport service for export of goods and had paid service tax thereon, leaving credit unutilized in the CENVAT account. The later notification was treated as an expansion of the eligible services under the refund scheme, and the mere fact that exports were made before its issuance did not, by itself, justify denial of refund. The deciding consideration was that the claim related to input services used for export and the credit remained unutilized.

Conclusion: The refund could not be denied on the ground of the later notification, and the respondent was entitled to the refund of unutilized CENVAT credit.

---