9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 2020X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are that the appellant is a SEZ Unit engaged in providing Information Technology Services, Business Auxiliary Services etc. They filed refund claim for the period Jul.'16 to Sept.'16 under Notification No.12/2013-ST, dated 01.07.2013 for refund of the service tax paid for services used for authorized operations of SEZ. After due process of law, the original authority partly sanctioned the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsp; Total 27,65,110 3. The learned consultant submitted that all the services are approved by the Development Commissioner and, therefore, the rejection of refund claim, stating that these services availed by the appellant do not have nexus with the authorized operations is not correct. When the Development Commissioner has approved the list of services being necessary for carrying out the aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., reported in 2017 (47) S.T.R.355 (Tri.-Mumbai) and M/s. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (LTU), Mumbai reported in 2013 (29) S.T.R.393 (Tri.-Mumbai). 4. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) supported the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. I have perused the notification, which is u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uced below:- "6. It is not in doubt that the services which were provided to the respondent were taxable and that the service tax on the supplied services had been discharged. The sole issue for determination is whether services for which tax has been collected along with consideration by the provider have been utilised in connection with the authorized operations for which the competent authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
