Whether Press Reporters May Be Allowed ... vs Commissioner Of Service Tax Bangalore

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No 296/2010 dated 18/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore]

For approval and signature:

HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No. 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No. 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes M/s INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.1, RAJIV GANDHI CHANDIGARH TECHNOLOGY PARK CHANDIGARH -160101 Appellant(s)

CST BANGALORE NO. 16/1, S.P. COMPLEX, LALBAGH ROAD, BANGALORE. Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Service Tax BANGALORE 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, Above BMTC BUS STAND, DOMLUR BANGALORE  560071.

Respondent(s)

M/s INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD PLOT NO.1, RAJIV GANDHI CHANDIGARH TECHNOLOGY PARK CHANDIGARH -160101 Respondent(s)

Appearance :

Mr. S. Anand, Advocate For the Appellant/Assessee Mr. Mohd. Yusuf, A.R. For the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 12/01/2015 Date of Decision: 12/01/2015 CORAM :

HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Final Order Nos. 20071 - 20072 / 2015

Both the appeals, one filed by the assessee and other by Revenue, are being disposed of by a common order as they arise after the same impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. For better appreciation of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), relevant paragraph is reproduced below :

4. In have carefully gone through the records of the case, oral and written submissions made by the appellant. I find from the impugned order that the adjudicating authority has held that the appellant has not produced any documentary evidence showing the usage of the input services in the output service exported and not fulfilled the conditions of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 and hence rejected the refund claims of Rs. 13,78,605/- & Rs. 13,33,459/-. I have perused the written brief submitted by the appellant and their contention that they have utilized the input services in their taxable export service and in the light of the Boards Circular No. 120/1/2010 dated 19.1.2010. I am of the opinion that they are entitled for refund of accumulated input service credit and direct that the lower authority to re-examine the rejected refund claims for consideration of their eligibility subject to submission of C.As certificate and the appellant need to produce certificate from the Chartered Accountant on the declaration of the appellants as per Boards Circular No. 120/1/2010 dated 19.1.2010. In view of the above, I pass the following order 

ORDER

I modify the impugned order-in-original No. 112/2009 dated 19.3.2009 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Division II, Bangalore, and direct the lower authority to re-examine the eligibility of the refund claim in terms of Boards Circular mentioned supra.

As seen from the above, the appellate authority has decided in favour of the assessee as far as the legal issue is involved. He has simpliciter directed to lower authority to examine the documents for the purpose of grant of refund of accumulated credit. As such, the appellant cannot be held to be aggrieved with the order. Accordingly, their appeal fails.

2. As regards the Revenues appeal, the only objection is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to remand. I find that the appellate authority has decided on the legal issue and simpliciter directed the lower authority to grant refund, subject to verification of documents. As such, the Revenues grievance does not survive.

3. In any case, the Tribunal has powers to remand and I remand the matter to the lower authority for grant of refund, subject to verification of relevant documents. Both the appeals are disposed of in above manner.

(Pronounced and dictated in open court)

(ARCHANA WADHWA) JUDICIAL MEMBER /vc/