2019 (3) TMI 418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mihir Deshmukh, Advocate, for respondent ORDER Heard both sides. 2. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal No. PK/353/ME/2017 dated 20.12.2017 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & GST (Appeals), Mumbai-II. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent had filed two quarterly refund claims for the period April 2012 to June 2012 and July ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R for the Revenue, on the basis of the report received from the Field Formation, has submitted that with the amendment to Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.4.2012, the definition of 'export turnover services' has been changed. It is his contention that in the earlier provisions, the value of the invoices was considered in counting the export turnover, whereas in amended rule,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....change. It is his contention that while reducing the export turnover of the services at numerator, the same amount should also be reduced from total turnover in the denominator in calculating the refund amount. 6. I find that the dispute centres around the fact that whether the respondent has claimed refund of cenvat credit paid on input services used for providing towards export services twice....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he refund claims based on the invoice value under the old provisions, if not claimed, could be claimed within one year from the relevant date even after 1.4.2012 but not twice for the same invoices, once while raising the invoices and second time while receiving the proceeds of the invoice. Both proceedings operate in different spheres which would be clear if the proviso to Rule 5(2) of Cenvat Cre....