TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds CENVAT Credit Refund, Confirms 'Port Service' as Input Service for Goods Export.</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Belgaum Versus Bellary Iron Ore Pvt Ltd</h3> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, affirming the respondent's entitlement to a refund of Rs. ... Refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - port service - input service - HELD THAT:- The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) referring to the judgments of this Tribunal in the cases of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAJKOT VERSUS ROLEX RINGS (P.) LTD. [2008 (2) TMI 295 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] and CCE, RAJKOT VERSUS ADANI PHARMACHEM P. LTD. & ORS. [2008 (7) TMI 102 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] held that ‘port service’ is an input service, accordingly, eligible for refund of the credit availed on the said service - there are no discrepancy in the said order of ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The services rendered at the port has been consistently held as an input service within the definition of ’input service’ as per Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, port being the place of removal in case export of goods. The order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Issues involved:The appeal filed by the Revenue against the rejection of a refund claim of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.Summary:Issue 1: Refund claim rejection and subsequent appealsThe respondent filed a refund claim of Rs.2,55,77,825/- for accumulated CENVAT Credit, which was initially rejected by the adjudicating authority. Upon appeal, the case was remanded for re-adjudication. The respondent was allowed a refund claim of Rs. 1,75,00,715/- but Rs. 80,77,109/- was disallowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, leading to the Revenue filing the present appeal.Issue 2: Eligibility of 'port service' as an input serviceThe Tribunal considered the orders of the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the eligibility of 'port service' as an input service for refund of credit. Citing relevant judgments, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that 'port service' qualifies as an input service under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, especially in the context of goods export. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE addressed the issues of refund claim rejection and the eligibility of 'port service' as an input service for CENVAT Credit refund. The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, emphasizing the consistent classification of port services as input services in relevant legal provisions and precedents.
TaxTMI 
