TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 559
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants have filed refund claim of Rs. 2,31,87,510/- (Rupees Two Crores Thirty One Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Ten only) for the period April 2006 to April 2007 seeking refund of unutilized credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules read with Notification 05/2006-CE (NT) dated 14/03/2006. Revenue issued a show-cause notice to reject the refund on the ground that the appellant was engaged in export of non-taxable services i.e. Development of Computer Software; which was not qualifying as exports under Export of Services Rules, 2005. Order-in-Original dated 14/08/2008 was issued confirming the rejection and the same was upheld by Order-in-Appeal dated 08/09/2009. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refund is barred by limitation is incorrect in view of Karnataka High Court judgment in the case of Suretex Prophylactics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex., Cus. & S.T., Bangalore [2020 (373) E.L.T. 481 (Kar.)] as the appellant has filed the refund within one year of the end of the relevant quarter. He also submits that though they have not specifically pleaded for grant of interest in view of the Board's Circular No. 398/31/98-CX dated 02/06/1998 and Circular No. 670/61/2002-CX dated 01/10/2002 and ratio of the following judgments interest on eligible refund is automatic. a. Garden Silk Mills Ltd. V. Union of India [2016 (338) E.L.T. 670 (Bom.)] b. Qualcomm India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2021 (50) G.S.T.L. 269 (Bom.)] c. Sap ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "5.6 The appellant mPortal India Wireless Solutions P. Ltd. was also a 100% EOU and the transaction undertaken are also identical in the sense that they relate to export of software. Therefore, the above decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the case before us. In any case, the object of EXIM Policy of the Government of India is to promote exports of goods and services and not export of taxes. Service Tax being a destination based consumption tax, in the case of exports there should not be any tax burden and the tax burden, if any, is to be imposed by the Government of the country where the services are consumed. Otherwise, it would render the exports of software uncompetitive. Keeping in view of above policy objective of the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 11B(1) of the Act and not on the expiry of the three months period from the date on which the order of refund is made. There cannot be any quarrel over the quantum of refund in view of the orders of the Assistant Commissioner, Division C, Bengaluru. Therefore, the impugned order does not suffer from any irregularity or perversity. 9. The rival submissions are examined in the light of the decisions by the High Court of Gujarat as well as High Court of Madras. The High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner, Central Excise v. Reliance Industries Limited supra, while considering a similar canvas against the payment of interest on delayed refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, in terms of the obligation to refund under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit Rules and Notification dated 18-6-2012, the provisions of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act would be clearly attracted. 10. The High Court of Madras, which was considering allowing interest on the delayed refund of unutilized credit under the Modvat Credit Scheme, has also concluded that the Modvat credit taken was nothing but payment of duty which would be available to the assessee on the assessee paying duty on inputs at the time of clearance of final bills and therefore, there is statutory obligation on the part of the appellant- Revenue under Section 11BB of the Act to pay interest for the delayed refund of the duty. 11. The Learned Counsel for the appellant-Revenue is unable to persuade this Court to hold that the obligati....