2018 (5) TMI 1121

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d Rs. 4,66,710/- as provider of 'business auxiliary service' along with interest thereon and penalties under section 76, 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 for the period from 2003 to 2007, Revenue challenges order-in-appeal no. PD/658 & 659/ST-I/2014 dated 11^th July 2014 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals IV), Mumbai. 2. Respondent is registered as provider of 'manpower recruitment and supply agency service' and it was alleged that they failed to discharge tax liability of Rs. 1,47,920 on Rs. 20,58,089/- received as remittance from abroad between March 2003 and November 2003, on Rs. 29,07,000/- received from 969 workers between 2002-03 and 2003-04 and of Rs. 2,76,318 on Rs. 27,09,000/- that was not declared in the returns f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d it is not applicable on export of services. Export of services would continue to remain tax free even after withdrawal of Notification No. 6/99, dated 9-4-99. Further it is clarified that service consumed/provided in India in the manufacture of goods which are ultimately exported, no credit of service tax paid can be availed or reimbursed at present as inter-sectoral tax credit between services and goods are not allowed.' 3. The original authority ordered recovery on the ground that the notification exempting the service providers who received their earning in foreign exchange was not in existence between 1^st March 2003 when notification no. 6/99-ST dated 9^th April 1999 was rescinded and the reinstatement thereof vide notification no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommission had been received were liable to be taxed similarly. 5. It is surprising that Revenue now makes a plea that a circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs and binding upon lower authorities should be ignored. The said circular was intended to ensure that the fundamental principle of export goods/services being relieved of the burden of taxes/duties should not be discarded in the absence of an exemption notification. There is no dispute that the consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange and there is no dispute that the customers of the appellant were situated outside the country. In these circumstances, the levy of tax on transaction which pertains to activities outside the country is not appropria....