TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 745
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s as provider of service under Service Tax category of Business Auxiliary Services (BAS in short) and Information Technology Software Services (ITSS in short). The appellant is also registered as software export firm and they export their services mostly parent or to their sister units situated abroad. For the month of July 2008, appellant filed refund a claim of an amount which was lying unutilized in their CENVAT Credit account, claiming it to be the services which were received by them for rendering output services viz. BAS and ITSS. Adjudicating authority after granting an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant and considering their reply to the show-cause notice, came to a conclusion that the export invoice under which the se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oice and submit that all these employees had traveled abroad for completing the work which has been given to them by their parent/sister concern. It is his submission that revenue authorities have not disputed that the appellant had exported services and there is no dispute as to the fact that foreign exchange remittances are received against the bills which are raised. 3.2 He would then draw our attention to the definition of BAS and ITSS as also the provisions of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 2004 and Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He would submit that except for the findings that the invoices which are raised by the appellant for export of services do not match with the descriptions of the export services viz. BAS and ITSS, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the amount of CENVAT Credit lying unutilized during the relevant period. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6. On perusal of the records we find that the issue is regarding refund of an amount lying unutilized in balance during June/July 2008. Undisputed facts are that the appellant here-in is registered with Hardware Technology Park and Software Technology Park created by Govt. of India for encouraging export of software services. It is also undisputed that the appellant had sought the service tax registration under the category of BAS and ITSS; that the appellant had availed CENVAT Credit on input services which were procured and utilized for providing output services unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s expressed by the adjudicating authority, the only reason for rejecting the appeal of the appellant seems to be the export invoices raised by the appellant does not indicate export of any service either under BAS or ITSS and hence there was no export of output service within the meaning of Export of Service Rules, 2005 or Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. We do not agree with the findings recorded by the first appellate authority for more than one reason. 6.3 Firstly, we find that Rule 3 of Export of Service Rules, 2005 specifically indicates that the services in relation to taxable services should be specified in clause (105) of Section 65 of the Act and also provides for exclusion. The appellant herein had registered himself with t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax paid on the services received by the appellant for export of services, is to reduce the cascading effect of the tax on the services which is the stated position of the Government of India, hence rejecting a refund claim on flimsy ground runs contrary to the government policy is an unacceptable position. 6.6 Fourthly, we called for invoices raised by the appellant and perused the disputed invoices. We find that the said invoices indicate number, date, project for which it has been issued, invoice addressed to the recipient of service, either parent/sister concern and indicates project code. The said invoice as has been issued and the annexures to the invoice indicates the project is in respect of a software developed and the purchase ....