2014 (12) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e service providers in the DTA. The Notification No.40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 exempts from whole of the service tax leviable thereon the services received by a unit located in SEZ or developers of the SEZ which have been used for authorized operations and this exemption can be availed by way of refund of service tax paid on the specified services received by a SEZ unit/SEZ developer for authorized operations. The appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 1,32,672/- in the prescribed form in respect of the tax paid on the services received during the period April, 2012 to December, 2012. However, in the refund claim, they mentioned the refund claim as having been filed in terms of the Notification No.41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012 and notificatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing of certain documents is mandatory, which have not been furnished by the appellant and that though the original adjudicating authority had brought the deficiencies in the refund claim to the appellant's notice vide letter dated 3.4.2013, the appellant did not reply and their claim that they did not receive the Asstt. Commissioners letter dated 24.03.2013 and the matter should be remanded to the original adjudicating authority, cannot be accepted. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri R.K. Sika, ld. Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that though the appellant is a SEZ unit and the refund is in respect of the services used for authorized operations and the service .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... licable notification is Notification no.40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, which is applicable in respect of the SEZ units and which provides for refund of the service tax paid on the services received by a SEZ unit or SEZ developer for use in or in relation to the authorized operations. Just because the appellant have mentioned the wrong exemption notification in their refund claim, the same cannot be rejected and as such, their refund claim must be considered in terms of the Notification no.40/2012-ST. 6. The notification no.40/2012-ST is subject to certain conditions and according to the department, these conditions have not been fulfilled and that a letter dated 23.04.2013 mentioning the deficiencies had been issued to the appellant, but the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X