By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, OCT 01, 2015: APPELLANTS were extended aviation servicing facility by Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd. (MIAPL) and charged an amount for extending such service on which service tax is paid.

Appellant had claimed refund of such service tax on the ground that the ATF which has been fueled by them in aircrafts were undertaking foreign voyage and hence it is export of the goods, for which the said services are used. The period involved is December 2009 to May 2010.

Lower authorities threw the contentions of the appellant outside the window and, therefore, the appellant is before the Tribunal.

It is submitted that the notification 17/2009-ST as amended by 37/2010-ST dated 28.06.2010 which grants refund of the service tax paid on the services which were utilized for export of goods needs to be considered in its correct perspective. Inasmuch when there is an export, no taxes has to be paid and refund needs to be sanctioned. Support is derived from the decision inter alia in Fomento (Karnataka) Mining Co. Pvt. Ltd. - 2014-TIOL-1402-CESTAT-Mum.

Amending Notification 37/2010-ST inserted the following entry -

The AR reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and viewed that the refund claim has been correctly rejected.

The Bench observed -

+ On perusal of the said Notification we find that the services which were considered by the Notification for refund of the service tax paid were as per the provisions of Section 65(105) and the said classifications were sub-clause (zn) and the payment of service tax on the services only known as terminal handling charges.

+ The services rendered by MIAPL will not fall under any of the two categories as the service tax discharged by MIAPL is under Section 65(105)(zzm). The service tax paid under the category of services provided by Airport authority under Section 65(105) (zzm) were inserted in Notification 17/2009-ST by Notification 37/2010-ST dated 28.06.2010.

+ The arguments of the learned Counsel is that this notification should be read as being effective in the Notification 17/2009-ST from the date it was issued is not acceptable. Notification 17/2009-ST specifically grants refund of tax paid on services provided under the category as per classification as mentioned therein.

+ The service tax paid by MIAPL is under the category which was not classified under Notification 17/2009-ST as it existed during the period when the services were received by the appellant for fueling the aircrafts which are on foreign run.

Holding that both the lower authorities were correct in rejecting the refund claim filed by the appellant, the appeals were rejected as being devoid of merits.

(See 2015-TIOL-2089-CESTAT-MUM)