TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e burdened with any taxes in order to make them competitive. Since the procedural formality of receiving the UAC approval is also complete, the ratio of Mylan Laboratories Limited case will apply in full force to the case in hand. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/30840 & 30848/2017 - A/30415-30416/2018 - Dated:- 5-2-2018 - Mr. M. V. Ravindran., Member (Judicial) Shri Vinay, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Arun Kumar, Deputy Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER These two appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-EXCUS-004-APP-0397-16-17-ST dated 31.03.2017 HYDEXCUS- 004-APP-01-17-18-ST dated 04.04.2017. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DGFT on 21.10.2014 and 9.4.2015. It is also not in dispute that the refund claims are within the time limit as prescribed in the said rules and the notifications. In my considered view it is an admitted fact that appellant being an SEZ unit is not required to pay any service Tax either to service provider or under reverse charge mechanism and even if he pays the same, he is eligible for the refund of the service tax liability so discharged. The bone of contention in these appeals being that the service tax liability was discharged correctly and when it was discharged the said services were not mentioned in the list of approved services. In my view this cannot be a reason for rejection of refund claim as it is an avowed policy of the Govt o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 (32) STR 543 (Tri.-AHD) = 2013- TIOL-1091-CESTAT-AHM, it was held that provisions of SEZ Act have overriding effect. Therefore, there appears to be no reason to deny the 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
