TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 447
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th Notification No.5/2006-CE (NT) dt. 14.3.2006 with the Asst. Commissioner / Deputy Commissioner. The adjudicating authority had granted partial refund of cenvat credit claimed by the appellant in respect of the five out of six refund claims filed by the appellant as per the chart furnished by them as under :- S. No. Claim Period Date of filing the claim Refund claimed (Rs. Refund rejected (Rs.) 1. April 2008 to June 2008 29th April 2009 16,86,324/- 16,86,324/- 2. July 2008 to September 2008 6th October 2009 10,61,530/- 3,88,862/- 3. October 2008 to March 2009 29th April 2009 25,03,480/- 6,50,342/- 4. April 2009 to September 2009 27th July 2010 18,16,941/- 4,10,619/- 5. October 2009 to March 2010 4th June 2010 15,85,596/- 1,68,113/- 6. April 2010 to September 2010 29th March 2011 18,30,480/- 70,439/- 1,04,84,351 33,74,699/- One of the above six claims involving major amount for the period April 2008 to June 2008 being Rs. 16,86,324/- was rejected only on the ground of credit being availed prior to obtaining registration with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Visa transaction fees, Rent-a-cab service, freight charges and claimed refund of tax paid on these services under Rule 5 of CCR 2004; that the denial of refund on the ground that the input services availed do not form part of the definition of input service under Rule 2 (l) is not correct. She submits that above services are alleged to be ineligible on a standalone basis. (a) Maintenance and Repair Service appellant being a software service provider has to highly rely upon its employees and equipments such as computers, servers etc. for rendering output service and maintenance services are primarily utilized towards maintaining the cleanliness of the premises thereby ensuring well-being of employees and to maintain such equipments in a functional condition. She relied on Loreal India Private Ltd. Vs CE Pune Service Tax - TMI - 203340 - Tri. (b) Consulting Service and Legal consultancy service: Appellant procure the services of legal consultant and other consultancy services in relation to the statutory compliances which are in relation to their business. The said services assist their organization in solving issues arising in the normal course of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and without questioning the eligibility for credit, the eligibility to rebate cannot be questioned. Thus, Ld. Counsel reiterated para 5.2 of the grounds of appeal. 4.3 On the third issue viz. refund being partially hit by limitation , the counsel submits in terms of Section of 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the relevant date for the purpose of Rule 5, refund is to be ascertained from the date of receipt of consideration for services exported during the relevant period. There has been Tribunals rulings that, date when the payments for the said export of services provided during the relevant quarter are realized, is the relevant date for the purpose of limitation under Section 11B. The relevant date of export of service is the date of receipt of foreign exchange. She relied on (i) Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE Delhi AIR-2013 126 CESTAT (ii) Hyundai Motor India Engg. Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Hyderabad - TS-207-Tribunal-2014-ST. (iii) Taco Faurecia Design Centre Private Ltd. Vs CCE Pune - 2014-TIOL-442-CESTAT-MUM (iv) Business Process Outsourcing (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCST, Bangalore - 2014 (34) STR 364 (Tri.-Bangalore). 5. Revenue was represented by Shri R.Chandrase....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efund claim on the ground of non-registration and the same was held to be unsustainable. Following these judicial precedents, the first issue is answered in favour of the appellant holding that even though they were not registered prior to 16.6.2008, they are eligible for refund of the unutilized credit which was accumulated prior to registration. 8. With regard to issue No.(ii), the learned Commissioner (Appeals) at para-8 of the impugned order has observed that appellant had availed input service credit and claimed refund on service tax paid for Maintenance and Repair Service, Consulting, Courier, Custom House Agent, Professional services, Insurance service , Visa transaction fees, Air Travel Agent service, Rent-a-cab service, freight charges etc. which, according to him, are not directly used for providing the output service and hence do not qualify for refund. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is first relevant state that the period of dispute in all these cases are prior to 2011. It is only w.e.f. 1.4.2011 that most of the categories of service were held to be ineligible for credit. I find that these services were used by the provider of output service and the Commissi....