TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Z Act overrides the provisions of any other law. Secondly, notification No. 9/2009 does not require that the refund claim should be filed before the approval of list of services as required under clause (a) of the notification. Thirdly, that they had genuine reasons for not filing the refund claim within the period of six months from the date of payment as required under clause (2f) of the notification ibid. The Ld. Counsel emphasis that service tax is not payable at all in respect of services provided to be SEZ units under the SEZ Act, and therefore, rejection of refund should not arise at all. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. A.R. stated that the list of services should have been got approved before the service was actually received. He s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he refund claim. 6.2 On the issue of time bar it is noted that 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
