2016 (3) TMI 851

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble from the supplies made to SEZ developers, has been settled. Even prior to the amendment the supplies made to SEZ is considered as export only and therefore the assessee is not required to pay an amount of equal to 10% value of the goods supplied to SEZ developers. See Commr. of C.Ex. & S.T. Bangalore Vs. Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2014 (9) TMI 633 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT) - Appeal No. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal submits that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not considered the issue whether any amendment by way of notification can have application retrospectively or prospectively. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not legal and proper. He prays to uphold the Order-in-Original and set aside the impugned order. 4. On the other hand, Shri Jitu Motwani, Ld. Counsel for the respo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s applicable from the supplies made to SEZ developers, has been settled. Even prior to the amendment the supplies made to SEZ is considered as export only and therefore the assessee is not required to pay an amount of equal to 10% value of the goods supplied to SEZ developers. 5. I find that all the judgments relied upon by the respondent's Ld. Counsel are directly appealable to the facts o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X