2019 (8) TMI 1645

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ell as Revenue. Since the issue involved in the appeals is identical, the same are taken up for hearing together and a common order is being passed. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee-appellant is inter alia, engaged in providing software related services for design, developing and testing for enhancement and improvement of Qualcomm group's existing products and new products. Such services provided by the assessee-appellant are categorised as taxable service, defined under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994. The assessee-appellant exports the entire output service to the outside countries. In view of exportation of the entire output service, the assessee-appellant was not in a position to utilise the Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edit is deniable on the ground of non-establishment of nexus, then in that case, the department was required to issue the show cause notice under Rule 14 ibid read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944/Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, Learned Advocate submits that since such provisions have not been invoked and refund benefit has been denied solely on the ground of non-establishment of nexus between the input service and output service, denial of the benefit of refund on such ground is not in conformity with the statutory provisions and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. He has also relied upon and referred to the Final Order No. 30707-30711/2017, dated 7-6-2017 passed by this ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ks of accounts. Thus, Rule 5 ibid provides for refund of accumulated Cenvat credit, subject to compliance of the procedures/guidelines laid down under the notifications issued thereunder. We find that the refund benefit was denied to the assessee-appellant on the sole ground that there was no nexus between the input services and the output service exported by the appellant. Further, in Revenue's appeal, it has been contended that certain disputed services are not conforming to the definition of input service provided under Rule 2(l) ibid. Insofar as taking of irregular Cenvat credit is concerned, Rule 14 ibid clearly mandates that in case of irregular availment of credit or its utilisation, such credit can be recovered from the assessee and....