Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2014-15/2333

Value of exempted service will also be added in export turnover for getting unutilised credit refund.

Case:-QUINTILES TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. V/S COMMR. OF S.T., AHMEDABAD

Citation:- 2014 (34) S.T.R. 753 (Tri. – Ahmd.)

Brief facts:- These appeals were filed by the appellant against six order-in-appeal Nos. 49/2013(STC)/SKS/Commr(A)/Ahd,53/2013(STC)/SK5/Commr(A)/Ahd,54/2013(STC)/SKS/Commr(A)/Ahd,56/2013(STC)/SKS/Commr(A)/Ahd all dated 28-3-2013 and OIA Nos. 130/2012 STC)/K.ANPAZHAKAN/Commr(A)/Ahd and   132/2012(STC)/K.ANPAZHAKAN/ Commr.(A)/ Ahd both dated 20-4-2013. Issue involved in all the six appeals were the same, therefore, the same were taken up together for disposal in the common order.

Appellant’s contention:- Shri Prakash Shah (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that appellant is engaged in providing I.T. enable services and have a centralised registration at Ahmedabad for providing Business Auxiliary Services. Appellant has been periodically filling refund claims of unutilised Cenvat credit under rule 5 of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 read with the provisions of Notification No. 5/2008-C.E. (N.T.), dated 14-3-2006. He argued that revenue is wrongly calculating the refund claim amount as per the formula given in rule 5(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It was contested that value of Technical Testing and Analysis Services are also required to be added both to the ‘Export turnover’ and the ‘total turnover’ defined in explanation to clause 5 of Notification No. 7/2010-C.E. (N.T.), dated 27-7-2010. It was said that sum total of all the services exported, whether dutiable or exempted, should be added to both the Export Turnover and Total Turnover. As appellant was not providing any services to the DTA and all the services were exported therefore the entire Cenvat credit of services taken and lying unutilised by the appellant, were required to be paid to the appellant and no Cenvat credit of any services used in exporting exempted services was taken by the appellant. He also argued that in view of CESTAT, Mumbai order in the case of Zenta Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai- V in appeal No. ST/455/2011[2012(27) S.T.R. 519 (Tri.) = 2012 (284) E.L.T. 45 (Tri.)] full refund of service tax credit was available to the appellant.     

Respondent’s contention:- Shri Manoj Kutty (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue argued that exempted services exported should be included only in the total turnover and not to be added to the export turnover as no service tax credit is admissible for exempted services. Learned AR accordingly defended the order passed by the first appellate authority.

Reasoning of judgement:-  The issue involved in the proceedings was only with respect to calculation of refund as per formula given in Rule 5(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules,2004. The prescribed formula is reproduced below:-

Refund amount= (export turnover of goods + export turnover of services) *net Cenvat credit
                                                                Total turnover

Further clauses (D) and(E) of rule 5(1) define the export turnover of services and total turnover as follow:-

“(D) “Export turnover of the services” means the value of the export service calculated in the following manner, namely:-

Export turnover of services= payments received during the relevant period for export services + export services whose provision has been completed for which payment had been received in advance in any period prior to the relevant period – advances received for export services for which the provision of service has not been completed during the relevant period;

(E) “Total turnover” means sum total of the value of –

(a) all excisable goods cleared during the relevant period including exempted goods, dutiable goods and excisable goods exported;

(b) export turnover of services determined in terms of clause (D) of sub rule (1) above and the value of all other services, during the relevant period; and

(c) all inputs removed as such under sub rule (5) of rule 3 against an invoice, during the period for which the claim is filed.”
 

It was the case of the appellant that 100% of the credit with respect to services exported should be refundable under rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is no evidence on record that appellant has taken any input service tax with respect to exempted services exported out of India. As per the definition of ‘Export output of services’, given in clause (D) of rule 5(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, no distinction should be made with respect to payment received from export of services. Further the logic of giving cash refund of taxes used, in relation to export of goods/services under rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, is to have ‘Zero rated’ exports. In the case of the appellant, no exempted service was provided in the domestic tariff area. Therefore, even exempted export services should be added to the export turnover of services and all the unutilised service tax credit pertaining to exported service will be admissible as refund under rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. This view is also fortified by view taken by CESTAT, Mumbai in the case of Zenta Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai in appeal no. ST /455/2011[2012(27)S.T.R. 519(Tri.)= 2012 (284)E.L.T. 45(Tri.)] which was relied upon by the appellant.

In view of the above observation, appeals filed by the appellants are allowed with consequential relief, if any.                              
       
Decision:-  appeal allowed.

Comment:-  This decision underlines that definition of export services does not exclude the exempted services. If the exempted services are exported then the value of this will also be included in calculating export services. Consequently, the refund of unutilised credit will also be allowed on this export services also.

Prepared by Monika Tak.
 

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