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 →

Sai Wardha Power Company Limited, formerly known as Wardha Power Company Limited Versus The Union of India, through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) , The Deputy Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax

2015 (7) TMI 823 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Benefit of ab initio exemption - SEZ units were exempted from payment of service tax utilized for the authorized operations of the SEZ units - Notification No.12 of 2013 - Held that:- Respondent No.2 was not justified in refusing authorization to the petitioner, in Form A2 for availing ab initio exemption from payment of service tax. On a perusal of the notifications, it is clear that the petitioner had an option to either pay the service tax in advance or not to pay the same, subject to the con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

res the approval of the 'Approval Committee' to the list of the services on which the SEZ unit wishes to claim exemption from service tax and furnishes a declaration, in Form A1 verified by the Specified Officer of the SEZ, it is rightly submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 or for that matter, any Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise is enjoined with a duty to issue the authorization, in Form A2. It is clear fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has not used the services exclusively for the authorized operations as per the undertaking, in Form A1. In terms of Notification No.12 of 2013, the petitioner unit is enjoined with a duty to submit to the Superintendent of Central Excise, a quarterly statement, in Form A3, furnishing the details of specified services received by it without payment of service tax. If that is so, the respondent No.2 could not have refused the authorization to the petitioner unit in Form A2 on the ground that some .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has illegally denied the benefit of Notification No.12 of 2013 to the petitioner unit. - Impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Writ Petition No. 5125 of 2014 - Dated:- 14-7-2015 - Smt. Vasanti A. Naik And Prasanna B. Varale,JJ. For the Petitioner : S. P. Dharmadhikari, Sr.Counsel with Mr.C.S.Dharmadhikari, counsel For the Respondent : Mr. Rohit Deo, ASGI for the respondent No.1. Mr.F. T. Mirza, counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3. JUDGMENT (Per Smt.Vasanti A. Naik, J .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ms of Notification No.12 of 2013 is also sought. 3. Few facts giving rise to the petition are stated thus - The petitioner is a power generating unit in the Special Economic Zone (hereinafter referred to as SEZ for the sake of brevity) in Warora. The unit of the petitioner is governed by the provisions of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2005 ). By a Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance in the year 2009, all SEZ units were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

service tax. Under Clause 2 of Notification No.12 of 2013, the SEZ unit was required to get the list of taxable services for the authorized operations of the SEZ unit, approved by the 'Approval Committee', a statutory body constituted under the provisions of Section 13 of the Act of 2005. The SEZ unit was required to furnish a declaration in Form A1, verified by the Specified Officer of the SEZ along with the list of specified services. As per Notification No.12 of 2013, on the basis of .....

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 to furnish an undertaking, in Form A1 that in case the specified services on which the exemption had been claimed, were not exclusively used for the authorized operations or were not found to have been used exclusively for authorized operations, it would pay to the Government an amount that is claimed by way of exemption from service tax along with interest on delayed payment of service tax. 4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner unit desired to seek the benefit of Notification Nos.17 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

petitioner unit within a period of fifteen days from the issuance of Form A1. Despite the approval of the list of the specified services rendered by the SEZ unit of the petitioner by the Approval Committee and despite the issuance of Form A1 by the Specified Officer concerned, it is the case of the petitioner unit that the respondent No.2 refused to issue Form A2 in favour of the petitioner thereby depriving the petitioner of the benefit of the Government Notifications of the years 2011 and 2013 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he petitioner unit on the ground that the petitioner unit was involved in the activity of manufacture and sale of electricity and as sale of electricity did not fall within the list of specified services, the petitioner was not entitled to Form A2. It is submitted that the appellate Authority, i.e. the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise and Customs, Nagpur has held in the appeals filed by the Petitioner unit that an unit would be required to sell the goods that have been produced and the obse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is obliged to issue an authorization in Form A2 on the basis of the declaration made by the petitioner in Form A1. It is stated that it is apparent from the notifications and also from the provisions of the Act of 2005, that the respondent No.2 is not empowered to make any further enquiry after the list of specified services is approved by the Approval Committee and a declaration in Form-A, verified by the Specified Officer of the SEZ is tendered to the respondent No.2 for issuance of the autho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ons mentioned in the impugned communication. It is submitted that the respondent No.2 could not have refused to grant the authorization in Form A2 merely because some claims of the petitioner for refund of service tax were rejected in the past and the petitioner had not achieved the Positive Net Foreign Exchange as per Rule 53 of the Rules of 2006. It is submitted that the reason for refusal of authorization in Form A2 on the ground that M/s. Krishnapatnam Port Company Limited, that provides som .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e manufacture and sale of electricity are different businesses stands answered in favour of the petitioner by the judgment of the appellate authority, dated 29/10/2013 in the appeals filed by the petitioner unit. It is stated that some of the claims of the petitioner unit for refund of the service tax had been rejected in the past and, therefore, the respondent No.2 had directed the petitioner to produce certain documents to substantiate its claim for issuance of authorization under Form A2. The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itions provided in the notifications. For seeking ab initio exemption, the petitioner unit was required to secure the approval of the list of services, as are required for the authorized operations of the unit on which the unit desires to claim exemption from service tax from the 'Approval Committee'. The Approval Committee constituted under the provisions of Section 13 of the Act of 2005 and which comprises of responsible officers had granted approval to the list of services for which t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n behalf of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 or for that matter, any Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise is enjoined with a duty to issue the authorization, in Form A2. It is clear from Notification No.12 of 2013, under which the petitioner unit has exercised an option not to pay the service tax ab initio, that the respondent No.2 was obliged to issue the authorization, in Form A2 to the petitioner unit in the circumstances of t .....

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