2023 (10) TMI 743

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls) has rejected the appeals of the appellant. 2. Since the issues involved in all four (4) appeals are common and therefore, all are taken up together for discussion and disposal, the details of which are given herein below in tabular form:- S. NO. APPEAL NO. NOTIFICATION NO ISSUE, PERIOD & AMOUNT 1 ST/13/2012 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 Jan 2009 to March, 2009 Refund Amount Rs. 3,49,262/- CHA-SERVICE Name of CHA on shipping bill is different than invoice submitted for refund. ROAD TRANSPORT Invoice submitted for refund is of different entity than entity issuing consignment note- Rs. 1,502/- EXPORT COMMISSION AGENT Not submitted proof of payment of commission or payment of Service Tax. TERMIN....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Chapter 52 & 55 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are registered with Central Excise Department. The Appellant is clearing its final product for export by utilizing various services during the course of export on payment of service tax. • The Appellant filed various refund claims as stated in the table above in respect of service tax paid on services used for export of goods for the quarters as shown in the table above before the adjudicating authority within prescribed time limit. • Thereafter, Revenue issued show cause notices proposing rejection of the refund claims on various grounds as stated in the table above. • The appellant filed detailed reply to the show cause....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o. A/60910-60912/2017 dated 09.05.2017 allowed the refund of service tax paid on CHA Services. Further, we find that in the case of Evergreen Suppliers vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore 2008 (9) STR 467 (Tri.-Bang.), it has been held that there is no restriction in the service tax law or in the Notification which restricts the activity of sub-contracting by CHA. In view of above, we hold that the appellants are entitled to refund of service tax paid on CHA Services. (ii) Road Transport:- As regards, the service tax paid on GTA Services, the Revenue authorities rejected the refund on the ground that the invoices submitted for refund is of different entity then the entity issuing consignment note. In this regard, we....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent/contract or any other documents with commission agent located outside India. In this regard, we note that as per the Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007, it is not necessary that the exporter must provide the agreement or contract rather any other document showing the payment of commission to foreign agent is sufficient to claim refund of service tax. Though, the appellant has filed copies of the agreement/contract and other document but the same was not considered by the revenue authorities. In view of these facts, we hold that the appellant has satisfied the conditions laid down in the Notification and is entitled to refund of service tax subject to verification by the lower authorities. (iv) Terminal Handling Charge....