CESTAT dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was not...

CESTAT dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was not the exporter entitled to refund under Notification No. 41/2012-ST. The Tribunal found the shipping bills and contractual documents showed title passed to the trading intermediary, who alone exported the consignments and realised export proceeds; the appellant merely supplied goods and was not the exporter for service-tax rebate purposes. Consequently refunds of service tax paid by the appellant were not allowable under the export-linked notification, and recovery proceedings against previously sanctioned refunds were sustainable. The appellant's invocation of merchant/third-party exporter concepts and EXIM benefits did not confer entitlement to refunds restricted to the actual exporter.

---