CESTAT rules in favor of appellant for service tax refund on container transportation under notification 17/2009.

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the refund of service tax on the transportation of empty containers for export goods under notification 17/2009. The Tribunal found that the service tax paid on such transportation is refundable under the said notification, citing a previous case with a similar outcome. The Tribunal upheld the denial of a specific amount due to missing documents but allowed the appeal overall, providing consequential relief to the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Refund of service tax on transportation of empty containers for export goods under notification 17/2009.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, the issue involved was the refund claimed by the assessee for service tax paid on the transportation of empty containers from yard to factory for stuffing of export goods under notification number 17/2009. The authorities had rejected the refund claim, stating it was not admissible under the said notification. The Tribunal noted that similar rejections for the same assessee had been previously addressed in cases like Vippy Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE Indore, where it was held that the service tax paid on such transportation is refundable under notification 17/2009. As the issue had been decided in the appellant's favor previously, the Tribunal found no merit in the impugned orders of the authorities below.

Another issue highlighted in the judgment was the rejection of an amount of &8377; 1622 on the grounds that certain documents, namely ARE-2s and shipping bills, were not enclosed with the reply to the show cause notice. The appellant's advocate agreed that this amount could be rejected due to the non-production of documents, acknowledging its inconsequential nature. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the denial of refund for this specific amount while setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. The judgment concluded by disposing of both appeals in the aforementioned manner.

---