2015 (6) TMI 870

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(in S.T.Appeal No.61/11) and Rs. 5,53,187/- (in ST. Appeal No.62/11) on account of services used for exported goods as per Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 as amended. The adjudicating authority had allowed Rs. 4,72,599/- from the said claim but rejected the claim of Rs. 1,97,088/- in respect of S.Tax.Appeal No. 61/2011; in S.Tax. Appeal No.62/2011, the adjudicating authority had allowed refund of Rs. 2,68,101/-from the said claim but rejected the claim of Rs. 2,85,026/- on GTA services. On Appeal the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has modified the Order and allowed refund on port services and rejected the refund claims relating to GTA services of Rs. 80,787/-(ST Appeal No.62/11) and Rs. 1,40,073/- (ST Appeal No. 62/11) observing that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tains to GTA services used for the export of goods. He has referred to the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of M.R. Organization Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad - 2010 (18) STR 209 (Trl.-Ahmd.) wherein interpreting the Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 as amended, the Tribunal has allowed the benefit of refund to the exporter in that case on similar circumstances. 5. Per contra, the ld. A.R. appearing for the Department has submitted that the condition laid down in the Notification is mandatory in nature and the claimant ought to satisfy all the conditions laid down under the said Notification, In support of his submissions, he has referred to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved as; "3. I have considered the submissions made by both the sides. In this case there is no dispute that the goods have been exported. There is also no dispute that courier service has been availed. The only objection Revenue has taken is that the invoices did not contain the necessary details and same have been given subsequently. No doubt the requirements, the receipt issued by the courier agency should contain are specified. However, there is no bar to provide these details separately in case the original receipt did not contain these details. In such a case Revenue would be free to insist on verification arid refund can be granted only after verification, As regards the evidence to link the use of courier service, it is not essent....