TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 796
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the case are that Appellant has rendered 'Consulting Engineer Services' to its parent company M/s Holtec International, USA. They filed refund claims under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 readwith Rule 6A of the Service Tax rules, 1994 in terms of Notification No. 27/2012 CE (NT) dt. 18.06.2012 towards Cenvat Credit paid on input services used in providing output services. The refund claim was objected by the refund sanctioning authority on the ground that since M/s Holtech International has taken registration on 02/07/2015 at Wakad, Pune, hence as per definition of service recipient in Rule 2 (i) of PPS Rules, the location of service recipient is premises for which such registration has been obtained i.e India. As both service provider and service r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce the present appeals by the Appellant. 2. Shri Prasad Paranjape, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that they are providing engineering, design and drawing services to their parent company i.e. Holtec International, USA and receiving the consideration in foreign exchange therefore their service qualify as export and are entitled for refund. He submits that as per the law settled in case of Paul Merchant Ltd. (2013 (36) STR 257), Microsoft Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. (2014(36) STR 766), Verizon Communication India Pvt. Ltd. (2018 (8) STR GSTL 32) (Del), SGS India Pvt. Ltd. (2014(34) STR 554) (Bom.), the recipient of service is the person who has contracted to avail the services and who is obliged to make payment for the services. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 65B(44), Explanation 3(b) of the Finance Act, 1994 an establishment of a person in the taxable territory and any of his other establishment in a nontaxable territory shall be treated as establishment of distinct person. The establishment of Holtec International in India and USA shall be treated as distinct persons. The Appellant did not provide any service in the project office in India which has been confirmed by an independent chartered Accountant's Certificate therefore denial of export status to the appellant on the basis of above contention is incorrect. He draws analogy with Section 66A of Finance act to submit that where the provider of service has his establishment in two countries, the country where the establishment of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oviding services to the customer - BGR Energy Systems Ltd who had placed the purchase order dt. 15.10.2013 on Holtech International USA. Such company opened office at Pune had no connection with the services rendered by the Appellant. The instant refund claims were filed on account of services rendered outside India and the claim has been filed in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In terms of provisions of Rule 6A (1) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 the services are treated as export of service when : - (a) the provider of service is located in the taxable territory, (b) the recipient of service is located outside India, (c) the service is not a service specified in the section 66D of the Act, ....