Page 19 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

2020 ] INDEX - 11th June, 2020 xvii
Reasons for sealing of premises under GST, sufficiency thereof - See under
SEALING ...................................... 171
REFUND/REFUND CLAIM :
— delay, scope of grant of interest - See under INTEREST ............. 147
— Export of service - Whether assessee provided Intermediary service or
Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency service to foreign principal -
Revenue contending that since assessee an agent of their principal and
provided Seafarers to third parties to be employed in overseas vessels, in
terms of Rule 9(c) of Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, he is to be
considered as an intermediary and services provided by him cannot be
treated as export - Assessee, a duly licensed Seafarer Recruitment service
provider, as per agreement not an intermediary particularly when entire
process of selection, medical test, insurance, transportation, etc. carried
out by him, for which he received payment in convertible foreign
exchange from first party/employer having its office in Singapore -
Services provided by him to be considered as export of service and
refund of input service credit admissible to him - Further, no
correlation/nexus between input service and export service required to
be established for allowing refund - Section 11B of Central Excise Act,
1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 and
Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 — Eastern Pacific Shipping (India) P. Ltd. v.
Commr. of CGST, Mumbai East (Tri. - Mumbai) ...................... 182
— Export of services - Failure to furnish original input service invoices
certified by Chartered Accountant at the time of filing claim cannot be
ground to deny refund of Service Tax paid thereon when an assessee
furnished a consolidated certificate of Chartered Accountant giving
details of all invoices - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as
applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 and
Notification No. 41/2007-S.T — Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. v. Commr. of CGST
& Cx, BBSR (Tri. - Kolkata) ............................... 207
— of deposits made through challans not utilized towards payment of duty -
Relevant date - Rejection of application for claim filed beyond one year
from date of deposit - HELD : Date of payment of duty yet to begin in
case where amount has been deposited only in account current but not
been utilized towards payment of Service Tax - Hence, relevant date not
yet begun in this case - Consequently, application for refund to be within
time limit and hence, needs to be sanctioned - Section 11B of Central
Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance
Act, 1994 — Deccan Shoppe Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad (Tri. -
Hyd.) ......................................... 185
— of deposits made through challans not utilized towards payment of duty -
As per Clause (b) to proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11B of Central
Excise Act, 1944, unspent advance deposits lying in balance in applicant’s
current account covered by Section 11B ibid - Once deposit covered by
Section 11B ibid, it is not open for anyone to pick and choose which
portion of Section 11B ibid applies to them and which does not - Entire
provisions of Section 11B ibid apply in absence of any specific clause
indicating otherwise - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as
applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 — Deccan
Shoppe Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad (Tri. - Hyd.) ........... 185

GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  19