2018 (12) TMI 92

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....utshell is that appellant company is engaged in rendering services of IT software and Business Auxiliary Service which are exported by the appellant company to its client located outside India. It had availed cenvat credit on input services in respect of the above referred services availed by it but its refund application filed under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 was rejected partly on tax paid on those services on the ground that those above referred were covered under the exclusion clause. Appellant unsuccessfully challenged the order-in-original before the Commissioner (Appeals) and preferred this appeal before this Tribunal seeking above referred relief. 3. In the memo of appeal and during the course of hearing of appeal, the ld....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lub service from the purview of availment of cenvat credit and sought no interference in the order by this Tribunal. 5. Heard from both sides and perused the case records. It is observed that before rejection of claim of the appellant that came through order-in-original, appellant was not noticed to justify the linkage between input and output service for which out of the total claim of Rs. 2,34,02,251/- appellant was denied refund of Rs. 41,87,020/- pertaining to those services and except a noting in the order-in-original at para 6 to which Table 3 is annexed that such services were inadmissible as per provision of Rule 2(I) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, nothing can be inferred from the Orderin- Appeal as to why those are inadmissibl....