2025 (12) TMI 1245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d in the provision and exports of services such as Back Office Operations (including Finance and Accounting Services), Human Resources Services, Geographic Information System Services, Data Processing Services and Support Centre Services to their overseas group company i.e. M/s Clifford Chance Business Services Pvt. Ltd. The appellants filed a refund claim of Rs.73,71,769/-, under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 read with Notification No.5/2006-CE (NT) dated 05.03.2006, for the period October 2008 to December 2008. A show cause notice dated 2nd July, 2010 was issued to the appellants proposing to deny the CENVAT credit on the grounds that credit was availed on Legal Consultancy Services which came to be taxable from 1st September 2009; payment for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Pvt. Ltd. - Final Order No.60261/2020 dated 06.02.2020, for the quarters July-September 2008, April - June 2008 & July September 2009. Learned Counsel submits that Knowledge Centre Services provided by the appellant is correctly classified as Management or Business Consultant Services; CBEC vide Circular F. No. 177/2/2001-CX4 dated 27.06.2001 clarified that services provided in relation to mergers and acquisitions are clearly covered under the scope of Management or Business Consultant Service. 3. Learned Counsel submits that the classification adopted by the appellants has not been challenged by the Revenue in assessment proceedings and therefore, it cannot be challenged while sanctioning refund which is executionary in nature as held i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ENVAT credit cannot be denied while deciding the applicability of refund as no proceedings were initiated under Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules as held in M/s Sentini Technology Pvt. Ltd. - 2020 (11) TMI 240 - CESTAT Hyderabad. For all his arguments, learned Counsel relies on the following cases: * Airbnb Payments India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, 2024 (9) ТМІ 1172 CESTAT Chandigarh * Blackrock Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commr. of CGST, Gurgaon 2022 (1) CEN 138 (Tri.-Chan) * M/s Fox Mandal & Co. vs. Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, 2024 (6) TMI 306CESTAT Allahabad * Acceleya Kale Solutions Ltd. vs Commissioner of CGST, Thane, 2019 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd that learned Counsel for the appellants could successfully demonstrate that it is not open for the Revenue to decide the classification of input service or to decide the eligibility of such input service at the time of sanctioning the refund. We find that the cases relied upon by the appellants are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. Moreover, we find that the nature of the service rendered by the appellants is Management or Business Consultant Services rather than Legal Consultancy Services. We also find that there is no merit in the argument of the Revenue that the refund of Rs.9,30,378/- is not admissible to the appellants as the payment was at a later date. We find that this issue stands settled in the case of AD-2 Pro Glob....