2017 (4) TMI 700

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....They are a Government of India, Public Sector Undertaking. In addition to supply to various Electricity Boards, they also export certain portion of their manufactured goods. The present dispute is related to the claim of the appellant for rebates under Notification No. 41/2012-S.T., dated 29-6-2012. The dispute involves four refund claims involving export orders under Notification No. 41/2012-S.T. The service tax rebates claimed which pertain to the tax paid under the category of Goods Transportation Agency for transportation of export consignment from their works at Bhopal to the port of Export. The Service Tax was paid by them under the provisions of Notification No. 13/2012-S.T., dated 20-6-2012, under reverse charge mechanism. The rebat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submitted before the lower authorities to grant them the benefit (alternatively) under 2(e) which grants rebates to that extent, still the lower authorities denied the rebate claim entirely. He further relied upon the several decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to support his arguments that notification needs to be interpreted liberally to determine the applicability in the case of an assessee but subsequently to be construed strictly while interpreting the clauses of notification. 7. To support his argument that the statute must be construed having regard to the purpose and object it seeks to achieve. He finally submitted that the rebate may be sanctioned to the assessee. 8. The learned DR on the other hand, reiterates t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n is that the exemption notification is required to be construed strictly at the stage of determination whether assessee falls within its terms. But once the provision is applicable to him, full effect must be given to it. They have relied upon the following decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to support the argument :- 1. UOI v. Wood Papers Ltd. [1990 (47) E.L.T. 500 (S.C.)]; 2. Novapan India Ltd. v. CCE [1994 (73) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.)]; 3. CCE v. Malwa Industries [2009 (235) E.L.T. 214 (S.C.)]. 11. It is also their submission that the notification gives two options for claiming the rebate for service tax on services used for export. In the option available at Clause 1(b) the rebate is payable on the basis o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he proposition that exemption notification should be construed strictly which means that benefit thereof should not be granted to one, who is not entitled therefor. But it is also true that those who are entitled to the benefit cannot be deprived therefrom by taking recourse to the doctrine of narrow interpretation simplicitor, although the purpose and object thereof would be defeated thereby." If the view taken by the authorities below were to be upheld, the person such as the appellant, who has exported the goods and used certain services for the same, and for whose benefit the Notification No. 41/2012-S.T. has been issued in the first place, will not get the benefit. A literal interpretation of Clause 3(b) would deny such refunds, in ....