Appellant qualifies for export service refund but denied credit on certain services. Remand for refund calculation.

The Tribunal held that the services provided by the appellant qualified as 'export service', entitling them to a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit. However, the credit availed on Building Maintenance Service and Rent-a-cab Service was denied. The matter was remanded to calculate the admissible refund amount, excluding the denied input services. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with the judgment pronounced on September 28, 2018.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the services provided by the appellant to their overseas customer qualify as 'export service'.
2. Whether the input services on which credit was availed fall within the scope of 'input service' under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Qualification of Services as 'Export Service':

The appellant provided "Technical Testing and Analysis Service/Scientific and Technical Consultancy Service" to an overseas customer in Denmark. The adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) held that these services did not qualify as 'export service' because they were performed in India. The appellant argued that under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, and the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, the services should be considered as exported since the recipient was located outside India and the payment was received in convertible foreign exchange.

The Tribunal noted that the appellant had previously been granted a favorable judgment in a similar case (Fertin Pharma Research & Development Pvt. Ltd.), where it was determined that services provided to an overseas recipient qualified as 'export service'. Additionally, the Tribunal referenced the case of Advinus Therapeutics Ltd., which also supported the classification of such services as 'export service'. The Tribunal concluded that the services rendered by the appellant were indeed export services, entitling them to a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

2. Eligibility of Input Services for CENVAT Credit:

The appellant claimed CENVAT Credit on various input services used in providing the output taxable services. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the credit for most input services but denied it for Building Maintenance Service and Rent-a-cab Service. The Tribunal upheld the denial of credit for these two services. It was observed that the appellant failed to provide necessary evidence to establish the nexus between Building Maintenance Service and the output service. Additionally, Rent-a-cab Service was excluded from the definition of 'input service' after an amendment to Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, effective from April 1, 2011.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal held that the services provided by the appellant qualified as 'export service', making them eligible for a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit, except for the credit availed on Building Maintenance Service and Rent-a-cab Service. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to calculate the admissible refund amount, excluding the denied input services.

Disposition:

The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with the Tribunal pronouncing the judgment in court on September 28, 2018.

---