TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 72
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-001-APP-1061 & 1062-19-20 dated 22.10.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Noida. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Appellant during the period April 2012 to June 2012 (the relevant period) was engaged in providing and exporting taxable services namely Information Technology Service, Maintenance and Repair Services, Technical Testing and Analysis Service and Business Support Service and availing Cenvat Credit of the service tax paid on various service received by them. The Appellant could not utilize the CENVAT Credit as the service tax was not payable on export of services, therefore, the Appellant was filing claims for the refund of the accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in absence of the description and classification of the service mentioned in the debit notes, it is not possible to ascertain the nature of service and relationship with the export service. 8. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected partially the appeal filed by Appellant-Assessee to the extent of Rs. 48,66,220 and allowed the appeal of the department in full. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) passed two separate Orders-In-Appeal. The Appellant-Assessee preferred appeals before this Tribunal against such Orders-in-Appeal because such Orders-in-Appeal were not passed simultaneously. The Tribunal remanded the appeals with a direction to pass a single order simultaneously in appeals filed against a single order. Though, the Department filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on reverse charge basis on the services received from outside India and CENVAT Credit was availed based on the Challans through which service tax was paid on reverse charge basis. d. As the service was provided from outside India so the service provider was not bound to follow the procedure of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules to issue invoices. The Appellant-assessee based on the debit notes paid the service tax through challan on reverse charge basis. Thus, the Appellant-Complied with the legal requirement. Neither Rule 5 nor Notification No.27/2012 required one to one correlation of the input service with the export service. The only requirement was to ascertain the availability of the balance of the CENVAT Credit and export of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y covered by decision in the matter of Microsoft Global Services Center (India) Private Limited and Microsoft India (R &D) Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Hyderabad-IV, 2021 (44) G.S.T.L. 264 (Tri. - Hyd.), wherein it was held as under:- "8. Rule 3 (1) ibid is the enabling provision, which entitles a manufacturer or provider of output service for availment of Cenvat credit of various duties and service tax paid on the inputs/input services. The manner of utilisation of such credit is contained in sub-rule (4) of Rule 3 ibid. In the event, where the Cenvat credit has been wrongly taken or utilised, Rule 14 ibid mandates for recovery of such irregularly availed credit from the service provider, in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....E & ST, Jaipur-I, 2019 (2) TMI 849 - Tri. NEW DELHI Computer Science Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Noida, 2017 (7) TMI 760 - Tri. ALLAHABAD CCE, NOIDA v. Free Scale Semiconductors India (P) Ltd., 2017 (4) TMI 1238 - Tri. ALLAHABAD 15. We further find that the reasons based on which the Department filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) were not legally tenable and justified. The provisions of Rule 5 or the Notification No. 27/2012 do not require one-to-one correlation of the input services with the output services exported by the Appellant. The foreign service provider was not an Assessee under the Finance Act, 1994 and documents were not issued in terms of Section 4A of the Act. However, the Appellant ....