Tribunal grants appeal based on lack of notice, export date determination.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal due to the rejection of the refund without proper notice and the determination of the date of export of service. The appellant succeeded in proving that they were not adequately informed of the specific rejection amount, violating principles of natural justice. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the service export occurred on the date claimed by the appellant, making them eligible for the refund under the relevant notification. As a result, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

---

---

Issues:
The issues involved in this case are the rejection of refund without proper notice and the determination of the date of export of service.

Rejection of Refund without Proper Notice:
The appellant filed a claim for refund of Service Tax paid on services exported under Notification No. 11/2005-ST. The show cause notice issued to the appellant did not mention the rejection of a specific amount of Rs. 13,77,971. The appellant argued that since they were not notified about this specific rejection, they were unable to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal held that this part of the order was not sustainable as the appellant was not given an opportunity to explain their position.

Date of Export of Service:
Regarding the rejection of another amount of Rs. 27,33,267, the key issue was determining the date of export of service. The notification in question required the export to take place in accordance with Rule 3 of Export of Service Rules, 2005. The appellant contended that the export, supported by an invoice raised on 30.06.2012, was completed on the same day. The Tribunal analyzed the relevant rules and concluded that the export of service indeed occurred on 30.06.2012, making the appellant eligible for the refund under the said notification. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal based on the findings related to the rejection of refund without proper notice and the determination of the date of export of service.

---