Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng the employees of the SEZ company from their residence to the workplace. There was no planning, scheduling of the tour involved in the said transportation of employees. The nature of services would fall under Rent-a-Cab Services only. Moreover, the appellant has been paying service tax under Rent-a-Cab Services for transportation of employees of companies other than SEZ units. The first issue is held in favour of the appellant. Whether the appellant is eligible for benefit of exemption under N/N. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004? - HELD THAT:- The said Notification uses the words services consumed within SEZ . In the present case, the service recipient is SEZ company. Though, the services have been provided partly outside the SEZ so as to facil .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ompany on the ground that the said company was an SEZ unit and, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of tax exemption under Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The Department was of the view that the services provided by the appellant is in the nature of Tour Operator Services and not Rent-a-Cab Services. Further, it was observed by the Department that since the transportation has taken place outside the SEZ zone also, the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The Show Cause Notice dated 21.06.2011 was issued to the appellant proposing to demand service tax along with interest and for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the Original Authority confirmed the demand, i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... situated in SEZ zone, it cannot be said that the services are not consumed within the SEZ zone. The Ld. Counsel referred to Section 26 as well as Section 51 of Special Economic Zone Act, 2005. It is submitted that Section 26 exempts an assessee from all taxes / duties while providing services to SEZ. Section 51 states that the SEZ Act would have over riding effect over any of the law for the time being force. The decision of the Hon ble High of Andhra Pradesh in the case of GMR Aerospace Engineering Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2019 (31) GSTL 596 (AP)] was relied by the Ld. Counsel to argue that in the said case, the Hon ble High Court had considered the issue of exemption available for services provided to SEZ. It was observed that since Secti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d period and the demand may set aside for this reason also. The Ld. Counsel prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 3. The Ld. Authorised Representative Shri Harendra Singh Pal appeared and argued for the Department. Paragraph 12 of the impugned order was referred to by the Ld. AR. It is submitted that Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004 specifically uses the words services consumed within the SEZ . The said condition was amended by Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 which stated that the exemption would be eligible whether or not the taxable services are provided inside the SEZ. The Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004 will be applicable for the disputed period and therefore, the exemption has been correctly denied b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... om their residence to the workplace, it cannot be said that the services are not consumed within the SEZ. The issue stands covered by the decision in the case of ORIX Auto Infrastructure Services Ltd. (supra). 8. The Hon ble High Court in the case of GMR Aerospace Engineering Ltd. (supra) has categorically held that since Section 51 has an overriding effect, the exemption benefit cannot be denied by conditions imposed in a Notification. 9. After appreciating the facts and following the decisions cited supra, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The demand cannot sustain. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates