Tribunal grants refund, remands for further adjudication on arithmetical accuracy.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the grant of consequential refund for the service tax demand and remanding the matter regarding the arithmetical accuracy of the refund claim for further adjudication by the original authority with an opportunity for the appellants to present their case.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the issue of eligibility for refund of excess service tax paid by the appellants to the government exchequer, specifically in relation to services provided to M/s CIDCO which were initially categorized under works contract service but later found to be exempted from service tax under Notification No. 45/2010-ST dated 20.07.2010.

Summary:

Issue 1: Eligibility for Refund under Notification No. 45/2010-ST

The appellants, engaged in providing electrical engineering services, had paid service tax under works contract service for activities related to erection, testing, and commissioning of transformers for M/s CIDCO. Subsequently, they sought a refund upon realizing the exemption under Notification No. 45/2010-ST. The department rejected the refund claim, asserting that the services provided were not solely for laying cables but involved erection jobs and equipment installation. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection, stating the services were not connected to transmission and distribution of electricity. The Tribunal, after examining the agreements and work orders, concluded that the activities undertaken by the appellants were indeed related to transmission and distribution of electricity. Therefore, the benefit of the notification should be available to them, and the service tax demand was set aside, allowing the refund.

Issue 2: Arithmetical Accuracy of Refund Claim

The Tribunal directed the original authority to reexamine the refund claim amounting to Rs. 17,02,362 to determine if it was paid in excess by the appellants. The matter was remanded for a fresh adjudication order, emphasizing the need for the original authority to consider all relevant documents submitted by the appellants. The appellants were granted a personal hearing before a decision on the refund amount was made.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the grant of consequential refund for the service tax demand and remanding the matter regarding the arithmetical accuracy of the refund claim for further adjudication by the original authority with an opportunity for the appellants to present their case.

---