Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

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