Refund of Service Tax on Courier Service u/Notification No. 41/2007-ST

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1313

Case: M.R. ORGANIZATION v/s COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD

Citation: 2010 (18) S.T.R. 209 (Tri.-Ahmd.)

Issue:- Refund of service Tax under Notification No. 41/2007-ST – Rejection of refund on Courier service on ground that all details not in invoice and link with goods absent – Set aside, held – details can be furnished later and link can be established later.

Brief Facts:- The refund claim filed by Appellant was rejected on the ground that the courier invoices produced by them did not contain all the details as per requirement of Rules and further there was no linkage of the invoices with the goods.

Appellant’s Contention:- Appellant contended that the refund claim relates to the period from April, 2008 to May, 2008 in respect of service tax paid to the couriers for the services rendered in relation to the goods. It was submitted that since the period was very close to the issue of the Notification, the invoices issued by the courier did not contain all the details. Subsequently, on a request made by them, the courier company had given all the relevant details.

Respondent’s Contention:- Revenue contended that the conditions for granting refund are enumerated in the Notification and if the invoice did not contain these details, refund cannot be given.

Reasoning of Judgment:- The Tribunal held that according to Notification No. 3/2008-ST dated 19-2-2008 in Sl. No. 10, for claiming refund the receipt issued by the courier agency is required to contain details of exporter, IEC No. etc. and also there should be evidence to link the courier service to export goods.

In this case there is no dispute that the goods have been exported and courier service has been availed. The only objection Revenue has taken is that the invoices did not contain the necessary details and same have been given subsequently. The requirements, the receipt issued by the courier agency should contain are specified. However, there is no bar to provide these details separately in case the original receipt did not contain these details. In such a case Revenue would be free to insist on verification and refund can be granted only after verification.

As regards the evidence to link the use of courier service, it is not essential that the invoice should contain the linkage. The exporter can produce such evidence later. Therefore, the rejection of refund claim on these grounds is not correct.

Decision:- Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Comment: - We have come across many cases where the department rigidly ask for the details mentioned in the notification to be present in the invoices. In this case also, courier does not write the IEC code as well as export invoice of exporter but the department insists on the same. The other link clearly establishes that it has been used in export of goods. But the exact details are not available on the same. Even in this case, it is held that it is a rectifiable defect and the party can do the same afterwards also. If the same are rectified then refund should be allowed to them.

Comments

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1313

Post a Comment

Query