Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Publish Date: 28 Feb, 2011
Print   |    |  Comment

Changes in Service Tax Refund Scheme

Change in Service Tax Refund Scheme

Prepared By:  
CA Pradeep Jain
And Sukhvinder Kaur, LLB[FYIC] 

The scheme of refund of service tax paid on specified services which were utilised for export of goods was given effect in 2007 vide Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007. The exemption was granted by way of refund. However, announcing the grant of exemption and actual granting of refund of service tax paid proved to be two different scenarios. The exporter claiming refund of service tax was not granted refund claim on various issues. Like for Port services, the ground taken for rejecting the refund was that the Authorisation from the Port Authorities was not obtained by the service provider providing Port and other port services. The issue that a particular service would fall under the Port services was also disputed. For example the Terminal Handling Charges and Repo charges were alleged to be not falling under the Port services.
 
The refund claim of services provided by Customs House Agent services was being rejected on the various grounds. The refund was not granted if exporters invoice no and date was not mentioned in the service provider’s invoice.  That the licence number of the CHA was not mentioned on the invoice of the CHA.
 
For fumigation (specialized cleaning services) the refund claim was being denied on the ground that the exporter had not produced a written agreement with the buyer for carrying out the cleaning activity of export cargo.
 
Service tax paid on Insurance service availed regarding export goods was being denied on the ground that the  document issued by the insurer for payment of insurance premium was not specific to the export goods. These are only few of the grounds for denying refund claim. These issues were not the conditions which the claimant-exporter were not fulfilling intentionally. But these were technical issues which were existing and could not be addressed.
 
Thereafter, to remove the anomalies existing in Refund scheme contained in Notification No. 41/2007-ST, the Government had introduced an improved scheme vide Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009. The said Notification removed certain anomalies existing in Notification No. 41/2007-ST but gave birth to new issues. We have written a series of articles titled “Johnny and service tax refund- Part-I” to bring about the problems faced by the exporters.
 
The refund claims under Notification No. 17/2009-ST were being denied on newer grounds. The use of the word that no refund claim less than Rs. 500/- will be entertained was interpreted by the Department to the effect that the each invoice/shipping bill was to be treated as an individual refund claim instead of the entire refund claim filed for one consignment/period.
 
Another issue was that the documents were not certified in the manner provided in the Notification. It was being insisted that the certification was to be done on the original invoice and if done afterwards, was not accepted. The refund claim of service tax paid on CHA services was being denied on the ground that the CHA licences numbers were not present in the invoices or the CHA was not holding valid licences. The refund of Terminal handling charges was denied saying that it is claimed under port charges. Instead it should be claimed under that category only. But there was no category like Terminal handling charges in the service tax. In nutshell the refund was not provided to the exporters. We once again continued with article series “Johnny and service tax refund- Part-II” to highlight the problems of exporters. Further, it was demanded through series of representation from all associations that the straight forward exemption should be granted in place of exemption by way of refund.
 
Now, in the Budget 2011-12, the Finance Minister has proposed to introduce a scheme for the refund of service tax paid on specified services used in export of goods on the lines of drawback of duties in a far more simplified and expeditious manner. This has been proposed to reduce the considerable difficulties in the sanction of refunds.
 
This may reduce the difficulties faced by the exporter in claiming refund. The technical issues may be redressed and fewer conditions would be required to be fulfilled. Thus, this is a welcome step on behalf of the Government which will help the exporters.
 
The Government has not agreed to demands of exporters of straight forward refund but has allowed the refund only. But it should be formulated in such a way that the exporters get the refund and it is not stuck up again as in old schemes. Hope for the best.  

*************

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com