Finality of prior findings and refund remand: export service receipt in Indian rupees stayed unchallenged, with factual verification sent back.

Receipt of export proceeds in Indian rupees was treated as insufficient to satisfy Rule 3(2)(b) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005, and that finding could not be reopened because it had already attained finality in earlier proceedings. On the remaining refund issues, the Tribunal considered remand appropriate for verification of the nexus between input services and export of output services, and for correction of alleged computation errors in the refund claims. The original authority was directed to examine the supporting records and refund calculations afresh after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity. The earlier finding remained undisturbed, while the factual refund issues were sent back for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the finding that realisation of export proceeds in Indian rupees could not satisfy the requirement of Rule 3(2)(b) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 could be reopened in the present appeals; (ii) whether the matter required remand for verification of nexus between the input services and export of output services and for correction of calculation errors in the refund claims.

Issue (i): Whether the finding that realisation of export proceeds in Indian rupees could not satisfy the requirement of Rule 3(2)(b) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 could be reopened in the present appeals.

Analysis: The earlier appellate order had already held that receipt of foreign inward remittance through Indian currency did not meet the requirement under the export service rules, and no further challenge had been carried against that finding. The issue had therefore attained finality and could not be agitated again in the subsequent appeals.

Conclusion: The issue was held against the assessee and was not open for reconsideration.

Issue (ii): Whether the matter required remand for verification of nexus between the input services and export of output services and for correction of calculation errors in the refund claims.

Analysis: The appellant produced sample records indicating that supporting documents such as the CENVAT credit register and invoices were available, and the Revenue did not oppose a remand on these aspects. The Tribunal considered it appropriate that the original authority verify the relevant documents and examine the computation of the refund claims after granting reasonable opportunity to the appellant.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration of the documentary nexus and refund computation issues.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded only to the extent of remand on the remaining factual issues, while the earlier finding on receipt of export proceeds in Indian rupees remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding that has attained finality in prior proceedings cannot be reopened in a later appeal, and factual verification of refund entitlement may be remanded for de novo adjudication where supporting records and computation issues require examination.

---