Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether refund of service tax paid on inspection and certification services was admissible under Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 09/07/2009 when the original invoices did not establish linkage with the exported goods and the supporting documents were subsequently interpolated and supplemented by a later certificate.
Analysis: The refund notification operated as an exemption by way of refund only for specified services used for export of goods. The original invoices merely recorded fees for inspection services and did not contain particulars such as the cargo, place of inspection, date of inspection, or any other material linking the service to the export consignments. The invoice and shipping-bill details were inserted later, and the later certificate from the service provider was not produced at the original stage and did not fill the evidentiary gap. On the facts, the documents failed to establish the required nexus between the service and the exported goods, and the interpolation of invoices showed lack of bona fides.
Conclusion: Refund was not admissible and the appeals were rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a refund notification requires proof that specified services were used for export, the assessee must establish a clear documentary nexus from contemporaneous records, and later interpolations or unsupported certificates cannot cure the defect.