2019 (8) TMI 1560

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... alia, engaged in export of Information Technology Services to its clients located outside India. For the purpose of rendering the said services, the appellant procures various services from the vendors located both outside and inside India. Wherever, the services were procured from the domestic vendors, the appellant availed Cenvat credit of service tax paid by them. Since, the output services were exported by the appellant, there was no scope or occasion to utilize the Cenvat credit available in the books of accounts and thus, the appellant claims refund benefit provided under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012 - CX. (N.T.), dated 18.05.2012. During the disputed period, the appellant had filed the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CCE - 2014 (33) STR 96 (Tri.-Del.) 5. CST Vs. WNS Global Services 2016 (44) STR 454 (Tri.-Mumbai) 3.2 The learned Advocate also referred to the letter no. 334/1/2012 - TRU dated 16.03.2012 issued by CBEC to state that under the amended provisions of Rule 5 ibid (effective from 01.04.2012), co-relation between the input and export of output services cannot be insisted upon and based on the formula prescribed in the Rule, the benefit of refund should be granted by the department. 3.3 With regard to availment of Cenvat credit on the basis of invoices issued beyond the period of six months, the learned Advocate submitted that the period of 'six months' was substituted by 'one year' vide Notification No. 6/2015 - CE (N.T.), dated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the input services, the fifth proviso appended to sub-rule (7) of Rule 4 ibid mandated that the credit shall not be allowed after six months of the date of issue of the documents specified in sub-rule (1) of Rule 9 ibid. The period of 'six months' was substituted for 'one year' vide Notification No. 6/2015 - C.E. (N.T.), dated 01.03.2015. The effect of substitution is that if the credit has been taken within one year from the date of the issuance of the invoice, then such credit cannot be denied to the assessee. Under the amended provisions of Rule 4 ibid, denial of the benefit of the Cenvat credit for the entire period of dispute is not proper and justified. I am of the view that the matter should be examined at the original stage for as....