TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1403
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....group companies i.e., overseas Barclays group companies, situated outside India. The appellants have duly registered with the department under jurisdictional Service Tax authorities and are holding Registration No. AADCB6996QSD001. The appellants have executed Service Level Agreements with the said group companies situated outside India. In accordance with the terms of the Service Level Agreement, the appellants periodically accept work orders and as per such work order, they rendered specific services to overseas group company entities. These services have been exported out of India, and therefore the appellants claim that such services qualify as "export" of service in terms of Rule 3 of the Export of Service Rules, 2005. It has also been stated by the appellants that some of these exports have been undertaken by them on payment of applicable service tax and in some cases, without payment of service tax. These details have been properly captured in their ST-3 returns filed before the jurisdictional Service Tax authorities/Department. 2.3 The appellant had filed a rebate/ refund application in the prescribed ASTR-1 form dated 28.01.2013....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y vide Invoice No. ICR_Invoice_60369_ 20722_12_2012_5 dated 25.05.2012 for an amount of US $ 216,037 and by Invoice No. ICR_Invoice_60369_ 20722_09a_2012_6 dated 28.06.2012 for an amount of US $ 131,221. They had also received the foreign exchange inward remittances (FIRC) paid to them by the overseas entity, being the export proceeds vide Serial No.0008812 and Serial No.0008814 both dated 22.08.2012, duly certified by the bank. Further, learned advocate also submitted the breakup details of services exported under Rule 4 & Rule 5 of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 along with the service tax discharged by reversal of CENVAT Credit as reflected in the ST 3 returns filed by them. Hence, he claimed that they had fulfilled all the requirement for preferring the rebate claim. However, the refund/rebate application filed by them was rejected by both the authorities below. With the above submissions and those made in the grounds of appeal, learned Advocate prayed for allowing the appeal, with consequential relief. 3.2 Learned Authorized Representative (AR) appearing for Revenue, reiterated the findings made by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order and submitted that in vie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... if any, shall be recoverable with interest as per the provisions of section 73 and section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994) as if no service tax and cess have been paid on such taxable service. 3. Procedure :- (a) Presentation of claim for rebate :- (i) claim of rebate of service tax and cess paid on all taxable services exported shall be filed with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be; (ii) such application shall be accompanied by,- a. documentary evidence of receipt of payment against taxable service exported and for which rebate is claimed, payment of service tax and cess on such taxable service exported; b. a declaration that such taxable service, rebate of service tax and cess paid on such service is claimed, has been exported, in terms of rule 3 of the said rules, along with the documents evidencing the export of such taxable service; (b) The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, if satisfied that the claim is in order, shall sanction the rebat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hority. Further, it also transpires that rebate/ refund of service tax paid on output service, which are exported is not covered under the first proviso to Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 and the appeal in such matter shall lie before the Tribunal. Since, the Finance Act, 2012 came into effect from 28.05.2012, all matters relating to rebate of service tax paid on inputs or input services which were pending before the Tribunal prior to 13.05.2015 shall also lie before the Revision Authority. Furthermore, all rebate claims in respect of service tax prior to 28.05.2012, both in respect of service tax paid on input or input services as well as service tax paid on output services, on the basis of extant legal provisions dealing with rebate of Central Excise duty paid being made applicable to matters of service tax, mutandis mutandis, shall also lie before the Revision Authority. Since, the present dispute deals with the period subsequent to the amendment brought in Section 86 ibid, it would clearly transpire that the Tribunal is the appropriate appellate forum for preferring an appeal against an order passed in respect of rebate of service tax paid on output services, which are expo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 by taking exemption on the value of service tax payable. Hence, the benefit of Rule 5 of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 would not be available to them. 7. In addition to that since the payment of service tax with respect to the export proceeds has not been made as is evident from the documents the relevant date for considering the time-barred claim cannot be taken as prescribed under Section 11 B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to Service Tax by virtue of Section 83 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. 8. As discussed above, I find that the said claimant has failed to provide sufficient grounds as are necessary for sanctioning the claim of rebate as per the Export of Service Rules, 2005 and therefore, the said claimant is not eligible for the rebate of the said amount in terms of the Notification No.11/2005-ST dated 19.04.2005, as amended. In view of the above discussion and findings, I pass the following order:- ORDER I hereby reject the rebate claim of Rs. 23,86,940/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eighty Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Only) filed by M/s. Barclays Wealth Trustees India Private Limited, as per provisions o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided in relation to business or commerce and can be called as "Business Support Services", as defined in Section 65(104c) of the Finance Act, 1994. These services are taxable in terms of Section 65 (105)(zzzq) of the Finance Act, 1994. 'Thus, I find that the appellant is providing Business Support Services, which are taxable and these services were exported to Overseas Barclays Group of Companies. The Adjudicating Authority has erred in arriving at the decision that these services provided by the appellant cannot be ascertained.' 11. Further, with reference to "payment of service tax on the exported services", the authority has concluded that as the appellant has claimed exemption of the export of services in the ST-3 returns, the payments made by them is not inclusive of their duty liability in respect of the export proceeds. On this point `the appellants contention is that in caption 3(1)(c) of the service tax return it is required to report the taxable value of services excluding export services, and duty payable is calculated on date and reflected under3(1)(f). There is no caption within the service tax return where service tax paid on export of services is to be repor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Moreover I find that in view of the above findings it will not be prudent enough to delve into the issue of time bar. 16. I am of the opinion that the onus is on the appellant to prove that Service tax & Education Cess has been paid in the respect of amounts claimed as rebate on all taxable services exported. The appellant has not submitted any reliable and proper documents for verification to conclusively prove their stance cogently and only making the contention would not suffice the purpose. The documents provided by applicant prove the contradictory facts of their claim of payment of taxes/cess. Thus, I am of the opinion that they have not fulfilled the rudimentary conditions of providing necessary evidence in respect of payment of duties/cess claimed as rebate, in terms of Notification No.11/2005-ST dated 19.04.2005 read with Rule 5 of Export of Service Rules, 2005. In the absence of which no relief can be extended to the applicant and accordingly, I hold that the lower adjudicating authority had fittingly rejected the rebate claim of Rs. 23,86,940/- of the appellant. Held Accordingly. 17. In of the above, I uphold the Order-in-Original No.RS/R- 121/2013 dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) paid to them by the overseas entity, being the export proceeds vide Serial No.0008812 and Serial No.0008814 both dated 22.08.2012, duly certified by the bank, in respect of the aforesaid two invoices for export of services outside India. 8.2 On careful perusal of the ST-3 return filed by the appellants on 23.11.2012 with the departmental authorities for the months of April, May, June of 2012, particularly details with respect to value of taxable services, service tax payable, service tax paid along with cess and mode of payment by cash, the following position emerges : Particulars April, 2012 May, 2012 June, 2012 Total Banking and Financial services (Value in Rs.) Export Turnover under Rule 4 1,03,04,112 Shown in F(1)(c)(i) - 58,29,160 Invoice No. ICR_Invoice_60369_ 20722_9b_2012_6 dated 28.06.2012 1,61,33,272 Export Turnover under Rule 5 - 1,20,22,459 Shown in F(1)(c)(i) Invoice No. ICR_Invoice_ 60369_ 20722_ 12_2012_5 dt. 25.05.2012 74,99,951 Invoice No. ICR_Invoice_60369_ 20722_9a_2012_6 dated 28.06.2012 1,95,22,410 Total Export Turnover 1,03,04,112 1,61,33,272 1,33,29,111 Shown in F(1)(c)(i) 3,56,55,706 Amou....