TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 378
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Srivastava, Assistant Commissioner, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER : ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had filed five claims for refund under Notification No.27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.06.2012 on the ground that they had exported the output service without payment of service tax during the period from January 2016 to March 2017, enclosing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... through the impugned order. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appellant is an intermediary and the place of provision of service will be determined under Rule 2(f) and Rule 9(c) and not under Rule 3 of Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. He further held that the condition under Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 was not satisfied. Therefore, he did not interfere with the origina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....services as the same is not permitted by IRDA. He has further submitted that the appellant does not have any power to bind the reinsurer and thus the basic characteristics of an agency relationship does not exist between the appellant and the German company. He has also submitted that the appellant is not concerned in respect of services rendered by German company to Indian customers. He has furth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vice tax against them claiming their activity to be services provided within India and, therefore, the findings of original and appellant authority are without any basis. 3. Heard the learned AR for Revenue. Learned AR has submitted that the original authority has not decided the issue on merit by examining the individual invoices and FIRCs and, therefore, the matter may be remanded to the origin....