Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 457 - AT - Service TaxDenial of refund claim - developer of SEZ - Consulting Engineering and Business Auxiliary Service - notification No. 9/2009 dt. 3.3.2009 - Held that:- Notification No. 9/2009 does not state that the list of services required in relation to authorized operations in the SEZ should be got approved from the approval committee before providing the services. The appellants have pointed out that they had filed the refund claim after the list was approved. Thus, the claim is in consonance with the requirement of notification. It is also noted that the SEZ Act, clearly provides under Section 50 (1) that it will have overriding effect over the provisions of any other law. As both the SEZ Act and Service Tax Act, have been passed by Parliament, the provisions of Section 51 have to be given effect to. The reliance placed on the DHL Logistic Pvt. Ltd. (2012 (6) TMI 458 - CESTAT, MUMBAI) by the A.R. relates to exemption notification No. 4/2004 which did not incorporate the refund mechanism. On the other hand, in the case of Intas Pharma Ltd. Vs. CST reported in [2013 (7) TMI 703 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], it was held that provisions of SEZ Act have overriding effect. Therefore, there appears to be no reason to deny the refund claim. Notification No. 9/2009 does give the authority to the Assistant Commissioner law to collect extension for filing of refund claim. The appellants were registered in 2009; thereafter took various approvals under SEZ Act and this being their first refund application, the same was filed beyond the six months period. They also needed time to ensure that the service provider not taken refund. The Assistant Commissioner should have examined the issue in total perspective while exercising his power under this clause (2f) of para 2 of the notification. The appellants have been filing refund claims thereafter which are receiving sanction. It would not meet the ends of justice, if the refund claim is denied when no service tax is payable under the provisions of SEZ Act. - Decided in favour of assesse.
|