9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Taxes whereby he has upheld the order of the original authority to the extent of rejection of Service Tax of Rs. 1,08,750/- paid on 'Real Estate Agent Service' and Rs. 1500/- paid on 'Management Consultant Service' on invoices dated 23.03.2016 and 13.07.2016 respectively ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the refund of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 6,85,705/- and rejected the refund of Rs. 1,10,250/- pertaining to the Service Tax paid in respect of 'Real Estate Agent Service' and 'Management Consultant Service'. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the appellant filed the present appeal. 3. Heard both t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (II) of the said Notification which deals with only ab initio exemption on the specified services received by the SEZ Unit. He further submitted that there is no requirement or conditions of prior approval in 3(III) based on which the refund is to be sanctioned. He also submitted that in the impugned order an undisputed fact regarding the receipt of service and its mention in the list of specified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the only issue in the present case is whether the appellant is eligible to claim refund of Rs. 1,10,250/- pertaining to service in respect of 'Real Estate Agent Service' and 'Management Consultant Service'. As per the stand of the Department, the said services have been used prior to its approval which is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
