9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als), LTU, Mumbai. 2. The brief facts of the case for consideration in these appeals are as follows. 3. The appellant M/s Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai (Special Economic Zone Developer and Special Economic Zone Units) filed nine refund claims towards the Service Tax paid on services consumed within the SEZ and services which were used in the authorized operations of the SEZ units. The refund claims were considered and partly sanctioned vide the orders passed by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner against which the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who further partly allowed the refund claims and rejected the refund claims partly. We are concerned with the refund claims rejected by the lower appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .3.2009 would come into picture as held by the lower adjudicating and appellate authority, the learned consultant submits that the very same notification exempts the taxable services provided in relation to the authorized operations in a SEZ and received by a developer or a unit in the SEZ. Therefore, payment of service tax was not warranted in the case of services consumed wholly within the SEZ. Merely because service tax was paid on the services consumed, it does not disentitle them from the benefit of exemption which they have claimed by way of refund. He also relies on the order of this Tribunal in the case of Wardha Power Company Ltd vs CCE reported in (2012) 14 STR 233 (Tri-Mum) in support of the above contention. 5. The learned Addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endment a condition was inserted stating that the refund procedure prescribed under the said Notification shall apply only in the case of services used in relation to the authorized operations in the SEZ except for services consumed wholly within the SEZ. This view of the department is also incorrect. Notification No. 09/2009-ST exempts the taxable services specified in Clause (105) of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 which are provided in relation to the authorized operations in a SEZ and received by a developer or units of a SEZ, whether or not the said taxable services are provided inside the SEZ, from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994. The refund procedure given below for operatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y other law for the time being in force. It is the avowed policy objective of the Government of India that exports should not bear the burden of taxes. If this policy objective has to be sub-served and the objective realized broader view of the provisions relating to refund has to be taken. Therefore, even if the appellant was not eligible for refund under Notification No. 09/2009-ST dated 3.3.2009, the appellants were certainly eligible for refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In this view of the matter, rejection of service tax refund is not sustainable in law. 7. In view of the above, we find that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and accordingly we set aside the same and allow the appeals with consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
