9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 820X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amsung Engineering Co Ltd, both of which companies are SEZ Units in Dahej, SEZ without payment of service tax and claimed exemption under Notification No.40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 & Notification No. 12/2013-DT dated 01.07.13. 1.1 The SCN dated 29.05.2017 issued to the Appellant demanding service tax by denying the benefit of Notification No. 40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 & Notification No. 12/2013-ST dated 01.07.13 on the ground that the Appellant provided services to M/s Samsung Engineering Co Ltd, Dahej, SEZ without proper authorization from competent authority in Form No.A-1/A-2. 1.2 The Appellant filed detailed reply dated 18.07.2017 along with documentary evidence like copy of contract dated 21.11.2013 between M/s Samsung Engineering ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mption from the service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994 on taxable services provided to a developer or unit to carry on the authorized operations in a Special Economic Zone as per Section 26(1)(e) of the SEZ Act,2005, that Section 51 of the SEZ Act,2005 has overriding effect over any other law time being in force. Therefore, in any case demand of service provided to SEZ is not sustainable. He further submits that even if the appellant is liable to paythe service tax the recipient of service in SEZ is eligible for refund. Therefore, the payment of service tax and subsequent refund will make the situation revenue neutral, for this reason also demand will not sustain. He placed reliance on the judgment of Ultratech Cements Ltd. Ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Α.Ρ.). Union of India Versus GMR Aerospace Engineering Ltd. (2023) 6 Centax 155(S.C.). 3. Shri Sanjay Kumar, Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue, reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that there is no dispute that the appellant have provided the services in the SEZ unit. Therefore, eligible for exemption from payment of service tax under Notification (supra). The lower authorities have denied the exemption only on the ground that the appellantfailed to submit form A-1 and A-2. We find that during the reply to show cause notice the appellant have submitted form No. A-1 and A-2, despite th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
