Service Tax
TRT-2025-
New Delhi High Court
Date:-14-12-22
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order date – 14 December 2022
Facts –
- The Petitioner, M/s Singtel Global India Pvt. Ltd, engaged in providing telecommunication services and claims that a part of its services are exported. The petitioner claims that export of services are zero rated, and the input tax credit available to it remained unutilised.
- The petitioner applied for a refund of input tax credit for the period July, 2015 to September, 2015. The refund was allowed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals).
- The learned Assistant Commissioner did not process the refund as directed by the orders passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), but took upon itself to once again re-examine the question as to whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of input tax credit.
- Being aggrieved the appellant had filed an appeal
Issue –
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of input tax credit?
Order –
- The Hon’ble High Court observed that it is clear from the impugned order that the Assistant Commissioner has sought to re-adjudicate the question as to whether the services provided by the petitioner are export of services or not. The impugned order has been passed in complete disregard of the judicial discipline. It is, ex facie, apparent that the learned Assistant Commissioner has attempted to overreach the orders passed by the superior authority.
- The Court relied on the written submission from Senior Standing Counsel, CBIC, which has fairly submitted that the impugned order, which proceeds on the basis that the petitioner is a provider of intermediary services, is incorrect and it is not open for the Revenue to take this stand. The Revenue would necessarily have to wait for the outcome of the appeals preferred by the learned CESTAT (which have since been dismissed as well).
- Hence the writ petition is allowed by directing the respondent to process the petitioner’s application within a period of four weeks from today and also the respondent shall consider the petitioner’s entitlement to interest considering the delay in processing its application.
Download Case Law
