TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1494
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... And Hon'ble P.V. Subba Rao, Member (Technical) Shri Rahul Binani, CA for the appellant Shri N. Bhanu Kiran, Asst. Commissioner/AR for the Respondent. ORDER PER: MS. SULEKHA BEEVI C.S 1. The facts of the case are that the appellants are a 100% EOU registered for providing "Information Technology Software Service (ITSS)" in the nature of information technology software service, Consulting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellant, Ld. Consultant Shri Rahul Binani appeared and argued the matter. He submit that the main reason for rejecting the refund was that the appellant has not established the nexus of the input services with the output services provided. He submitted that the period involved is prior to 01.04.2011 and all these services were used by the appellant for providing the output service. The second....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to the issue of nexus of the input services and output services, he relied on the decision of M/s Reliance Industries Limited [2016-TIOL-2392-CESTAT-MUM)]. 3. Ld. AR Shri N. Bhanu Kiran appeared and argued the matter on behalf of the department. He reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He stressed that the appellant has availed credit on ITSS which are not eligible as these services we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for output services. The appellant has provided details of various services that were used during the relevant period for providing output services. Major part of the refund is for the period prior 01.04.2011 and a small amount of refund is for period after 01.04.2011. It is submitted by appellant that they have not availed credit on services excluded from the definition of 'input services' after ....