VISHAL PIPES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant are Merchant -Exporter exporting automobile parts (rubber components). They filed a refund claim on 18 -6 -2010 for an amount of Rs. 49,644/ - in respect of services of Clearing and Forwarding and courier services used by them in export of the goods during the period from 11 -7 -2009 to 24 -7 -2009. This refund claim has been submitted in terms of the provisions of Notification No. 7/2009 -S.T., dated 7 -9 -2009 issued under Rule 96(1) (sic) of the Finance Act, 1999, which exempts certain services specified therein were used in the export of the goods out of India. This exemption is subject to certain conditions and following the procedure as prescribed therein. According to para -2 of the notification, the manufacturer exporter, who is registered under Central Excise Rules shall claim the exemption by filing a refund claim of Service Tax paid on the specified services to the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner/Dy. Commissioner in prescribed form A -I. However, Merchant Exporter, who is not so registered as Central Excise assessee, is required to file a declaration in Form A -2 with the jurisdictional Asstt./Dy. Commissioner. In this declaration the Merchant Exporter, besides giving his full name, is required to declare the address of the registered office, Income Tax PAN No., IEC No., details of the bank account, constitution of exporter company whether the proprietorship concern, partnership concern, Private Limited and Private Company and the name, designation and address of the authorized Signatory, along with declaration that he shall maintain the records pertaining to export goods and taxable services used for export of goods and shall make those records available at the declared premises for inspection by Central Excise Officers. On receipt of this declaration, the Asstt./Dy. Commissioner is required to verify the same and, if satisfied, allot a STC Code within seven days. The Merchant -Exporter can, thereafter, file the refund claim in Form A -I. In this case, the appellant, a merchant exporter, did not file the declaration in A -2 form and as such, no STC code was allotted and he directly filed the refund claim which was rejected by the Asstt. Commissioner and on appeal being filed to the Commissioner (Appeals), the Asstt. Commissioner's order was upheld vide order dated 24 -5 -2011, against which this appeal has been filed. Shri N.K. Sharma, ld. counsel for the appellant, pleaded that though the appellant did not file the declaration in Form A -2 and as such, no Service Tax code had been allotted to them, the impugned order is not sustainable inasmuch as the Asstt. Commissioner rejected the refund claim without granting personal hearing and as such, there has been denial of natural justice. He, therefore, pleaded that he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for de novo decision after grant of personal hearing.