News Update

Unveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesI-T- Secured creditor has priority charge over secured asset, over claims of I-T Department & other Departments; any excess amount recovered by Secured Creditor from auction of secured asset, over & above the dues payable to it, are to be remitted to the Departments: HCFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesI-T - Once assssee on year of reversal has paid taxes on excess provision and similar feature appeared in earlier years and assesee had payments for liquidated damages on delay of deliverables, no adverse inference can be drawn: HCFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerST - Software development service & IT-enabled service provided by assessee was exempt from tax during relevant period, by virtue of CBEC's Notification & Circular; demands raised for such period not sustainable: CESTATUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayCus - Order rejecting exporter's request for conversion of Shipping Bills on grounds that the same has been made by exporter beyond period of three months from date of Let Export Order in terms of CBEC Circular No. 36/2010-Cus : CESTATIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEACus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTATThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCX - As per settled law, a right acquired as result of a statutory provision, cannot be taken away retrospectively unless said statutory provision so provides or by necessary implication has such effect: CESTAT
 
ST - Refund - Appellant's claim is that by virtue of Sec 68(2) since liability to pay partial ST has been imposed on them, they become service provider is misplaced: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, FEB 09, 2018: THE appellants are engaged in the export of non-excisable commodity, namely, "fruits pulp".

They received input services of Manpower Recruitment and Security and claimed refund of the tax paid under rule 5B of CCR, 2004.

The refund claims were rejected by the original adjudicating authority relying on Rule 5B of the CCR, 2004 read with Notification NO. 12/2014-CE(NT).

The Commissioner (Appeals) while concluding that the appellants were not service providers and, therefore, not entitled to refund, short listed the following questions:

"(1) Whether the appellant, who pays service tax under reverse charge mechanism (a recipient of taxable service but liable to pay duty in terms of the provisions of Section 68 (2) of the Finance Act, 1994) can also be called "output service providers?

(2) Whether manufacturer of goods having "Nil" tariff rate of duty is eligible for Cenvat Credit at all?"

The Commissioner (Appeals) also held that the appellants are not entitled to CENVAT Credit as the final products manufactured by them is not excisable.

The appellant is before the CESTAT and submits that they are entitled to CENVAT credit in view of the decisions in Drish Shoes Ltd. - 2010-TIOL-350-HC-HP-CX and Sharp Menthol India Ltd. - 2011-TIOL-490-HC-MUM-CX. Moreover, as regards refund, it is submitted that in view of the provisions of section 68(2) of the FA, 1994, since they are required to pay service tax on reverse charge basis, they become service providers and are entitled for the benefit of notification.

The Bench extracted paragraphs 27 & 28 from the decision in Sharp Menthol (supra) and held that in view of the same, the CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on the ground that the final product "fruit pulp" exported by the appellants is chargeable to Nil rate of duty as per tariff.

As regards the second issue, the CESTAT observed -

"5.1 It is clear from the notification [12/2014-CE(NT) dated 03.03.2014 ] and Rule 5B that the said rule and notification are intended solely for the service provider providing specific services. The appellant's claim is that by virtue of Section 68(2), since liability to pay partial service tax has been imposed on them they become service provider is misplaced. The Act differentiates between the service provider and person liable to pay service tax under different circumstances. It is possible that the person liable to pay service tax may not be the service provider. If the Government intended to provide this facility to service recipient paying service tax on reverse charge basis the Government would have used the word "person liable to pay service tax" and not the word "service provider". Section 68(2) is a special mechanism for shifting part liability to pay service tax from "service provider" to "service recipient" but it does not convert in the "service recipient" into "service provider". In these circumstances, Rule 5B has no application in the appellant's case.

The impugned orders were upheld and the appeals were dismissed.

Quick Reference:

5B. Refund of CENVAT credit to service providers providing services taxed on reverse charge basis. - A provider of service providing services notified under sub-section (2) of section 68 of the Finance Act and being unable to utilise the CENVAT credit availed on inputs and input services for payment of service tax on such output services, shall be allowed refund of such unutilised CENVAT credit subject to procedure, safeguards, conditions and limitations, as may be specified by the Board by notification in the Official Gazette.

(See 2018-TIOL-492-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023