Service Tax
TRT-2025-
Cestat Kolkata
Date:-13-07-22
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:- 0
Order Date: 13 July 2022
Facts-
- The Appellant, M/s Sethia Oils Ltd’s refund claim was rejected on the ground that exporter should be registered with the “Export Promotion Council” and being registered with “the Solvent Extractor’s Association of India” which is a Trade Promotion Organization (“TPO”), in getting the benefit of the Provision of Notification No.41/2012 Rebate of Service tax paid.
- The Appellant contented that they are registered with TPO recognized and sponsored by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce for export of “De-Oiled Rice Bran” and hence the condition of the Notification No.41/2012 was satisfied.
- Aggrieved by the impugned order, the Appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
Issue-
- Whether the Appellant is eligible for the refund claim without having registration with “Export Promotion council”?
Order-
- The Tribunal observed that there is no dispute that the goods were exported by the Appellant, and Service tax was actually paid on export activity, in terms of the broad scheme of refund. Accordingly, refund must be granted to the Appellant.
- It was further observed that, the sole intention of the government to bring out these rebate schemes is to promote the exporters to compete with the global market exporters.
- The Tribunal held that the Impugned Order cannot be sustained as substantive benefit should not be denied to Appellant if the conditions are fulfilled and rejecting refund on flimsy grounds would defeat the purpose of rebate scheme and trap the exporters under unnecessary litigations.
- Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed with consequential benefit.
Download Case Law
