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 / RSS

2022 (2) TMI 1121

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing into other - are to be considered: the exclusion of some of the activities from the ambit of service tax and the ineligibility of a portion of CENVAT credit taken by them for monetization. The dispute has its genesis in the refund of accumulated CENVAT credit of Rs. 13,36,901/-, attributed to 'input services' deployed for rendering of 'service' to M/s Rolex SA, Geneva in the six quarters spanning from July 2012 to December 2013, sought by appellant under rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 in accordance with the procedure stipulated in notification no. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18th June 2012. Even while rejecting the claim as inadmissible in the circumstance of the purported transaction of M/s Rolex Watch Company Private Ltd with M/s Rolex ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....partment allowed cash refund of accumulated Cenvat credit considering the appellant as not an 'intermediary', hence denying the cash refund of the accumulated Cenvat credit for the intervening period, in our opinion, is bad in law. Consequently, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per rule. xxxxx 10. The present issue is in respect of the refund claims filed in terms of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as amended from time to time. The said rule provides for the refund of accumulated credit in the Cenvat account in respect of goods and services exported under bond or undertaking. This rule is very specific and lays down how to determine the quantum of admissible refun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y being covered by 'intermediary services' in Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, by which, contrary to the default benchmark of 'location of recipient', it is the 'location of provider' that determines 'taxable territory', is at odds with the conclusion of no 'service' having been provided or received. The test of 'service' is not financial flows - or 'consideration' - which is bereft of any standing except in the context of the entirety of section 65B(44) of Finance Act, 1994. There has been no foray in that direction by the lower authorities and, without determination of exclusion from 'service' in the manner intended therein, the proposition of absence of 'service' to alienate financial flows from 'consideration' is not tenable.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in India and that, even by stretching the connect, the later incorporation of 'supply of goods' in the scope of 'intermediary service' in 2014 precluded such fastening appellation on their transaction during the period of dispute. 6. Learned Authorized Representative contended that the appeal merits dismissal in view of the clear findings of the lower authorities that the activity is nothing but 'intermediary service' which determines 'taxable territory' as the place at which appellant was located. 7. On perusal of the contract, it is seen that there are two obligations that devolve on the appellant, viz, promotion and marketing of Rolex watches in India and undertaking repairs/replacement during the warranty period for which neither the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dentified the terminal entities that the appellant is purportedly 'intermediary' for, the manner in which the 'intermediary' service is recompensed in the channelizing of 'consideration' from the customer to the supplier or the origin of the supply of service in the course of which the 'intermediary' facilitation by the appellant occurs. The adjunct proposition of 'no service' to obfuscate this lacuna brings the contradiction to the fore - the determination of 'intermediary' is founded upon the obligations in a contract which should not only have been redundant but also not acknowledgeable as contract if the proposition that the compensation terms therein, not being 'consideration' in the absence of 'service', are an internal arrangement fo....