Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
R.R. Global Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 31 March, 2015
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Appeal(s) Involved: ST/2680/2010-DB, ST/2681/2010-DB, ST/2682/2010-DB [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal Nos. 67, 68 & 69/2010 (H-II) S. Tax dated 27/07/2010 passed by the Commissioners of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals-II), Hyderabad.] For approval and signature: HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL 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 R.R. GLOBAL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD 8-2-120/86/3, FLAT NO.P-3, KRISHNA SINDHU RESIDENCY, ROAD NO.3, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD - 500034. Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax HYDERABAD-II L.B STADIUM ROAD, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD - 500004 ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, CA HIRAGANGE & ASSOCIATES #1010, 1st floor(Above Corp. Bank) 26th Main, 4th T Block, Jayanagar, BANGALORE - 560041 KARNATAKA For the Appellant Dr. A. K. Nigam, Addl. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 31/03/2015 Date of Decision: 31/03/2015 CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER Final Order No. 20913-20915 / 2015 Per : ARCHANA WADHWA All the three appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by Commissioner (A) and the issue involved is identical in all the three appeals.
2. The appellants are exporters of calibrated iron ore lumps. They paid service tax on the transportation of the said product from the mines to the port of export for different periods and subsequently claimed the refund of the said service tax in terms of Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007, as amended by subsequent Notification No.3/2008-ST dated 19.2.2008. The said refund claims stand denied by the authorities below on the ground that the appellant has not fulfilled the condition No.(iii) of Sl. No.11 of the Notification inasmuch as the details of exporters invoice relating to export of the goods transported from mines to port of export do not stand mentioned in the lorry receipts.
3. We find that an identical issue were the subject matter of the earlier decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Jumbo Mining Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad: 2012 (26) S.T.R. 525 (Tri.-Bang.), while considering an identical objection raised by the Revenue, the Tribunal observed that as the consignments are of huge quantum, they cannot be transported by a single lorry and are required to be aggregated at the port premises before shipping documents could be prepared. In such circumstances, strict compliance of the above condition cannot be made and the same should be ascertained by broadly correlating evidence of transport and service tax paid on such transportation charges and quantum exported. To the same effect is another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jumbo Mining Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad: 2013 (32) S.T.R. 481 (Tri.-Bang.) as also in the case of Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd. vs. CCE, Ahmedabad: 2010 (17) S.T.R. 262 (Tri.-Ahmd.). Inasmuch as the issue is decided, we set aside the impugned order and hold that the appellant is entitled to refund of the said service tax paid on transportation of the goods subject to verification. Inasmuch the lower authorities rejected the refund on the above legal issue and they have not gone into the verification of the said claims, which is required to be done at the level of original adjudicating authority. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals and remand the same to the original adjudicating authority for the sole purpose of verification of the assessees claim. All the three appeals are disposed of in above manner.
(Order pronounced in open court) B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER rv 3