Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2019 (11) TMI 1263

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation No. 27/2012-CE(NT. 2. The respondent is a 100% subsidiary of WM Logistics LLC, USA. As per the agreement with their parent company, they provided product development support services for collection and disposal activities of WML, USA. The respondent was registered for providing taxable services including 'Information Technology Software Service'. The dispute pertains to the claim for refund filed by the respondent for the period October, 2016 to March, 2017, for refund of accumulated cenvat credit in terms of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with the relevant Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012. The respondent claimed that they have exported their output service. The claim was supported by the necessary do....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant in above cases on the basis of documents submitted with the refund claims. 11. In present case, I find that the appellant has filed refund claim of cenvat credit on input services used in export of services, under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 alongwith similar set of documents as that of their previous refund claims. I also find that present refund claims has also been rejected on similar grounds as that of their previous refund claims. 11.1 In the circumstances I find that Hon'ble CESTAT Final Order No. 52609/2018 dated 18.07.2018 & Final Order No. 52907/2018 dated 27.08.2018 are binding on me as judicial discipline as per ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme court vide judgment in case of M/s Kamlakshmi Finance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 5. Being aggrieved by the order-in-appeal, the Revenue is in appeal on the ground that, filing of SOFTEX Form is the mandatory requirement as per guidelines issued by RBI. Moreover, the Additional Director, STPI, Indore vide letter dated 28.12.2016 also confirmed that in case of offshore export of goods/ services through data communication link, it necessary to declare the same through SOFTEX Form, as per the RBI guidelines. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the Revenue appeal. 6. Heard Shri Mohammad Irshad Ahmed, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-assessee. He states that there is no error in the impugned order in appeal, as the learned Commissioner (Appeals) have followed the order of this Tribunal, in allowing the ....