2017 (9) TMI 787 - AT - Service Tax

Exporter wins refund for input services under Notification No. 41/2007-ST despite non-registered address hiccup

The appellant, an exporter of ready-made garments, sought a refund under Notification No.41/2007-ST for input services received at non-registered ... Refund claim - whether the appellant is entitled to refund under N/N. 41/2007-ST, as amended with respect to input services which were received at other than registered address and such addresses have been subsequently recognised by the Department by issuing centralized registration certificate? - Held that: - the appellant was having centralized billing and accounting system, it is apparent that these services utilized at the non-registered addresses during the relevant period, the output services generated at such premises was availed or accounted by the registered office at C-32, Sector-58, Noida - the appellant is entitled to refund of the balance amounting to ₹ 1,25,442/- under N/N. 41/2007-ST - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Entitlement to refund under Notification No.41/2007-ST for input services received at non-registered addresses subsequently recognized by the Department.Analysis:The appeal in question pertains to the entitlement of the appellant for a refund under Notification No.41/2007-ST for input services received at addresses other than the registered one, which were later acknowledged by the Department. The appellant, an exporter of ready-made garments, applied for a refund of &8377; 2,81,674/- for the period July-2008 to September-2008. The Assistant Commissioner allowed the refund in part but rejected an amount of &8377; 1,25,440/- as the services were not received at the registered premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance, emphasizing the importance of reflecting the required particulars on invoices and the significance of procedural compliance.Upon hearing the arguments, it was noted that the Department recognized three addresses, other than the registered one, where the disputed services were received in a Centralized Registration Certificate issued on 22nd December, 2008. The Range Superintendent's letter dated 31st December 2008 acknowledged the appellant's centralized billing and accounting system at the mentioned addresses. Considering this, it was concluded that the services utilized at non-registered addresses during the relevant period were accounted for by the registered office. Consequently, it was held that the appellant is entitled to a refund of the balance amounting to &8377; 1,25,442/- under Notification No.41/2007-ST. The appeal was allowed with consequential benefits, and the adjudicating authority was directed to disburse the amount within 45 days along with applicable interest.