2023 (10) TMI 1379

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri P. Ganesan, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent RAMESH NAIR : The issue involved in the present case is whether the appellant being sub-contractor provided service in SEZ on behalf of the main Contractor, is eligible for exemption from service tax vide Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 20.05/2009. 2. The case of the departme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Ganesan, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the record. We find that Revenue has denied the exemption on payment of service tax under Notification No. 09/2009-ST only for the reason that the appellant being a sub-contractor, have not provi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... operation has been satisfied. Therefore, exemption cannot be denied to the appellant. This issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the following decisions; (a) Sudhir Chand Jain vs. CCE - 2018 (8) GSTL 302 (Tri. All) (b) CST vs. Fedco Paints and Contracts - 2017(3) GSTL 364 (Tri.- Mumbai) From the above judgments and the discussion and findings given hereinabove, there is no doubt in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X