9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovision of service. 3. The brief facts are that the appellant - Hyderabad Infratech Pvt Ltd., is a holder of service tax registration and are providing services under the head renting of immovable property service and maintenance and repair service to the units situated in the SEZ premises. Pursuant to audit, it was observed that the appellant assessee in their ST-3 returns, had declared certain consideration towards export of service. However, they did not mention the Notification No. under which they were claiming exemption in the returns for the period March 2012 to June 2012. But during the period from July 2012 to 2015-16 appellant had claimed exemption from payment of service tax under Notification No. 40/2012-ST, read with Notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pts taxable services provided to Developer or a Unit, to carry on the authorised operations in SEZ. Further, Section 51 provides that the SEZ Act will have overriding effect over any other provision under any other law, which is in consistent with the provisions of the SEZ Act. 7. The Learned Commissioner was pleased to confirm the demand holding that the appellant is not entitled to exemption as they have not complied with the condition of the exemption Notification under the Finance Act, read with rules there under. 8. Learned Counsel further urges that the issue is no longer res-integra and the same have been considered by the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in GMR Aero Space Engineering Ltd., Vs Union of India, reported at [2019 (31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Form A1/A2 is available in respect of all the service receivers. Thus, it is not the case of noncompliance of exemption notification for the whole period. 11. Learned AR for Revenue relies on the impugned order. 12. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that the dispute here is squarely covered in favour of the appellant, as held by Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in GMR Aero Space Engineering Ltd., (supra) and further confirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in appeal by Revenue. We further find that under similar facts and circumstances the Co-ordinate Bench at Mumbai in the matter ECLERX Services Ltd., Vs Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Navi Mumbai reported at [2022 (9) TMI 166 - CESTAT-Mumbai], on the allegation that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
