Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Essar Steel India Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST., Surat

2015 (4) TMI 781 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Denial of Refund claim - Exemption claim - services availed by SEZ unit - Non fulfillment of conditions of notification - Notification No. 17/2009 ST dated 07.7.2009 as amended by Notification No. 40/2009 ST dated 30.9.2009 - held that:- Exemption is admissible to the exporters of goods with respect to specified services received and used by the appellant for export of goods. It is observed from the case records that services were received by the SEZ unit of the appellant under invoice dated 30. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t be admissible. - It is not denied by the Revenue that both the SEZ unit and the DTA unit were Later merged and the appellant therefore, become rightful claimant of the refund of Services availed by the SEZ unit of the appellant. Appellant can not be asked to fulfil the condition of Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated 03.3.2009 which he has not claimed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/11235/2013 - Order No. A/10310/2015 - Dated:- 10-4-2015 - Mr. H.K. Thakur,J. For the Appellant : .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated 03.3.2009 was not fulfilled. 2. Ms. Dimple Gohil (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that at the time of receipt of services, appellant had one SEZ unit at Hazira and another DTA unit at Hazira. That when refund of services availed by SEZ unit were made under Notification No. 17/2009ST dated 07.7.2009 then both, SEZ unit and the DTA unit merged under the DTA unit of the appellant. That appellant was the rightful claimant, and therefore, re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

10. 3. Sh. S.K. Shukla (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue defended the order passed by the first appellate authority and argued that appellant was eligible to refund of export linked taxes only under Notification No. 9/2009 ST dated 03.03.2009. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceeding is whether appellant is eligible to refund by way of exemption under Notification No. 17/2009ST dated 07.7.2009 as amended by Notification No. 40/2009ST da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version