Export of services exemption cannot be denied merely for delayed EXP-1 and EXP-2 filing when supporting documents are later furnished.

Exemption under Notification No. 18/2009-ST could not be denied solely for delayed filing of EXP-1 and EXP-2 when the prescribed documents were later furnished and the tax-paid commission certificate supported the claim. The levy related to export of services, and the procedural lapse was attributable to delay in receiving invoices from foreign commission agents. On these facts, denial of exemption for non-compliance with the time limit in the notification was not sustainable, and the service tax demand could not be upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether denial of exemption and confirmation of service tax demand for failure to furnish EXP-1 and EXP-2 within time under Notification No. 18/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009 was sustainable.

Analysis: The demand was founded only on non-fulfilment of the procedural requirements in the exemption notification. The documents were later furnished, along with a certificate supporting the tax-paid amount on commission paid to foreign agents. The levy related to export of services, and the record did not justify denial of the exemption merely because of delay in filing the prescribed forms, especially when the lapse was attributable to delay in receiving invoices from foreign commission agents.

Conclusion: The denial of exemption on procedural lapses was not sustainable, and the demand could not be upheld.

---