9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 146 - AT - Service TaxRefund claim - services availed in relation to authorized operations in SEZ - HELD THAT - The issue decided in appellant own case ATC TIRES (P) LTD. VERSUS CCE ST TIRUNELVELI 2019 (2) TMI 1178 - CESTAT CHENNAI where it was held that any service tax paid/ remitted by a service provider is liable to be refunded to the provider who has remitted service tax in relation to taxable services provided to the unit to carry on authorized operations in a SEZ - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Refund claims related to services availed for authorized operations in Special Economic Zone (SEZ) under Notifications No. 9/2009-ST and 15/2009-ST. Analysis: The judgment revolves around the dispute concerning refund claims filed by ATC Tires Pvt. Ltd. in relation to services availed for authorized operations in SEZ. The original authority rejected the refund claims, which were upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that a similar issue was addressed by the Tribunal in their own case, where the Tribunal ruled in their favor. The issue primarily focused on the interpretation of Notifications No. 9/2009-ST and 15/2009-ST regarding the exemption and refund of service tax for services used within the SEZ. The Ld. DR contended that for services consumed wholly within the SEZ, the refund was specifically barred. However, the Ld. Advocate relied on previous Tribunal orders and legal provisions to support the appellant's claim for refund. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments presented by both sides, referred to previous judgments in similar cases. The Tribunal highlighted that Notifications No. 9/2009 and 15/2009 do not disentitle immunity to service tax provided by the provisions of the Act. These notifications facilitate the process of claiming a refund of service tax for taxable services provided to a unit in SEZ. The Tribunal emphasized that the procedural prescriptions of the notifications should not eclipse the immunity to service tax under the Act. The Tribunal also cited relevant case laws, including the Gujarat High Court judgment, to support the appellant's claim for refund. Based on the analysis and interpretation of the legal provisions and previous judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned orders rejecting the refund claims could not be sustained. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals with consequential benefits as per the law. In conclusion, the judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legal provisions and previous judgments related to refund claims for services used in SEZ. It clarifies the interpretation of Notifications No. 9/2009-ST and 15/2009-ST and emphasizes the right of recipients of taxable services within SEZ to claim a refund of service tax. The judgment reaffirms the principles established in previous cases and sets a precedent for similar disputes in the future.
|
