Nokia India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, considered appeals filed by a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) unit challenging the rejection of refund claims for service tax paid on specified services used in authorised operations. The appellant had claimed refunds for service tax paid on rent-a-cab operator services, business support services, and outdoor catering services. The refund claims were initially rejected by the adjudicating authority and subsequently upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that these services were used in connection with authorised manufacturing activities.
The appellant argued that the services in question were approved by the Development Commissioner as “specified services” and were used in authorised operations. It was further submitted that the issue had already been decided in the appellant’s favour in an earlier Tribunal order for a prior period, where such services were held to qualify as “input services” eligible for refund. The appellant contended that the rejection of refunds for the subsequent period was therefore unsustainable.
The Revenue reiterated the findings of the lower authorities and raised specific objections regarding two invoices—one lacking details of service tax paid and another not bearing the appellant’s name—arguing that refunds based on these invoices were not admissible. The appellant conceded and did not press claims relating to these invoices.
