TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Special Economic Zone unit was entitled to refund of service tax under Notification No. 09/2009-S.T. for specified services approved for authorised operations, when the services were received before the notification date or outside the SEZ, and whether refund could be sanctioned on the basis of a Chartered Accountant's certificate.
Analysis: Notification No. 09/2009-S.T. grants refund of service tax on specified services used in relation to authorised operations in an SEZ, subject to approval of the service list by the Approval Committee, actual use of the services for authorised operations, payment of service tax, and absence of CENVAT credit. The decisive condition was payment of service tax on or after 03.03.2009, and the place or earlier receipt of the services did not defeat the claim where the services were otherwise used for authorised operations. The approval already granted by the Development Commissioner covered the bulk of the services claimed, and the rejection based on location of receipt or the timing of receipt was not supported by the notification. The use of a Chartered Accountant's certificate to establish correlation and utilisation was also not impermissible in the circumstances.
Conclusion: The refund claim was admissible and the assessee was entitled to relief.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
