TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 885
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sent case is that the appellant against export of service, received payment for the services in Indian rupees from Deutsche Bank and FIRCs issued by the bank has been produced before the lower authorities, whether in respect of such remittance refund is admissible under Export of Service Rules, 2005. The second issue is whether the security services and air travel services used by the appellant is an input service for providing output service which were exported. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, relied upon the judgment in the case of ETA Travel Agency Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai 2007 (7) STR 454 (Tri.-Bang.) and held that since the appellant has not received the service charges from overseas entity in convertible foreign exchange whereas the payment was received in Indian rupees, the condition of Rule 3(2) of Export of Service Rules, 2005 was not complied with and accordingly the services will not be treated as export of services. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled for the refund. 3. Shri Prasad Paranjape, learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the payment for the export services were received in Indian rupe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as foreign exchange. He submits that, in view of above, the Foreign Exchange Management Act, clearly provides that when the payment against any export is received even in Indian rupees, but through authorised dealer, the payment/remittance should be considered as foreign exchange. 3.3. He placed reliance on the hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of J.B. Boda and Company Private Lid, vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes AIR 1997 SC 1543 wherein it was held that the payment towards insurance brokerage retained by the Indian agent from the total payment of premium to be paid to the foreign insurance company and the balance amount was remitted to the foreign country in foreign exchange insurance brokerage they retained in Indian rupees was held to be foreign exchange and the benefit of income tax was extended. He placed reliance also on the following Tribunal's judgments: (i) Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot vs. Shelpan Exports 2010 (19) STR 337 (Tri.-Ahmd.); (ii) National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur 2008 (11) STR 156 (Tri.-Del.) ; (iii) Nipuna Services Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I have gone through the Notification No. FEMA 9/2000-RB dated 3rd May, 2000, the relevant para No.4 of the said Notification is reproduced below: "4. Manner of Repatriation :- (1) On realisation of foreign exchange due, a person shall repatriate the same to India, namely bring into, or receive in, India and- (a) sell it to an authorised person in India in exchange for rupees; or (b) retain or hold it in account with an authorised dealer in India to the extent specified by the Reserve Bank; or (c) use it for discharge of a debt or liability denominated in foreign exchange to the extent and in the manner specified by the Reserve Bank. (2) A person shall be deemed to have repatriated the realised foreign exchange to India when he receives in India payment in rupees from the account of a bank or an exchange house situated in any country outside India, maintained with an authorised dealer." From the sub-para (2) of para 4 above it is very clear that, when a person receives in India payment in rupees from the account of a bank situated in any country outside India maintained with an authorised dealer, the payment in rupees shall be deemed to have repatriated the realized foreign e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade under Section 47 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, in the present case the foreign remittance in Indian rupees through Deutsche Bank is the receipt of payment in convertible foreign exchange. 8. I have gone through the hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of J.B. Boda and Company (supra) wherein it was held that: "12. The facts brought out in this case, are clear as to how the remittance to the foreign reinsurance company is made through the Reserve Bank of India in conformity with the agreement between the appellant and the foreign reinsurer, and that the remittance that the amount due to the foreign re-insurers as also the brokerage due to the appellant and the balance due to the foreign reinsurer is remitted (and expressed so) in dollars. It is common ground that the entire transaction effected through the media of the Reserve Bank of India is expressed in foreign exchange and in effect the retention of the fee due to the appellant Is dollars for the services rendered. This, according to us, is receipt of income in convertible foreign exchange. It seems to us that a "two way traffic", is unnecessary. To insist on a formal remittance to the forei....