SRF LTD. Vs. C.C.E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are aggrieved by rejection of refund claim on the ground that the documents issued in respect of services relating to activities at the port of export have not been issued by the port or any person authorized by the port and that the documents being debit notes, refund is not admissible. The issue in all the above appeals being the same, they were heard together and are disposed by this common order.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as under :

(3.) The case of the appellant is that the impugned services are covered under the scope of Notification No. for the purposes of exemption by way of refund. As per the notification taxable services specified in Column (3) of the Schedule are exempted from payment of tax subject to fulfillment of conditions stated in corresponding entry in Column (4) of the Schedule, provided they are received and used by the exporter for export of goods. The specified services stated in Serial No. 2 of the notification refer to services used for export of goods. There is no condition attached to these services in Column (4). It is the contention of the counsel that the authorities below have rejected the claim giving a go by to the plain and literal interpretation of the notification. The relevant notification for the purposes of the appellant's case being notification No. , the impugned services need not answer the description of specific sub clause of Sec. 65(105). Further as per Board's Circular No. 112/6/2009 -ST dated 12/03/2009 the Board has clarified that regardless of classification of service by the service provider, the refund must be granted if it is otherwise in order.