Tata Realty & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax-I (CESTAT Mumbai)
Material Facts: The appellant entered into an agreement dated 10.12.2007 with M/s TRIF Management (Mauritius) Ltd. (TML), Mauritius, for providing investment advisory services during the period April 2009 to September 2009. The services included identifying investment opportunities, providing financial, economic and market intelligence reports, monitoring portfolio companies, advising on investment and disinvestment decisions and rendering other advisory services as directed by TML.
For providing these services, the appellant availed various input services on which service tax had been paid by the service providers and accordingly availed CENVAT credit. Since the output services were exported, the accumulated CENVAT credit could not be utilized. The appellant therefore filed a refund claim under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) dated 14.03.2006.
The original adjudicating authority sanctioned a refund of Rs.44,46,438 by order dated 30.06.2011 under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to service tax matters through Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.
The Committee of Commissioners reviewed the order and directed filing of an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals), by order dated 30.11.2016, allowed the Revenue’s appeal and denied the refund, holding that the services were effectively used in India since they related to investment opportunities and business activities of Indian companies.
