Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>SEZ unit not liable for service tax on services to DTA unit</h1> <h3>PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Versus LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED</h3> PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Versus LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED - 2016 (44) S.T.R. 369 (Guj.) Issues Involved:1. Whether the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal committed a substantial error of law in holding that for the purpose of service tax, the respondent's SEZ unit and DTA unit are a single legal entity and thus not liable to pay service tax.Detailed Analysis:1. Statutory Provisions and Definitions:The court referred to Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994, which pertains to the charge of service tax, and Section 65(105), which defines various taxable services. Clause (zzzq) pertains to services provided in relation to support services of business or commerce. Section 65(104c) defines 'Support Services of Business or Commerce' and includes various services such as evaluation of prospective customers, telemarketing, processing of purchase orders, etc. The court noted that in ordinary circumstances, it is not even the respondent's case that the services provided by the SEZ unit are not taxable services.2. Special Economic Zones Act, 2005:Section 2(za) defines a Special Economic Zone (SEZ), and Section 2(zc) defines a unit within an SEZ. Section 7 provides for exemptions from taxes, duties, or cess for goods or services exported out of, imported into, or procured from the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) by a unit in an SEZ. Section 30 pertains to domestic clearance by units, indicating that goods removed from an SEZ to the DTA are chargeable to duties of customs.3. SEZ Rules, 2006:Rule 19(7) of the SEZ Rules, 2006, states that if an enterprise operates both as a DTA unit and an SEZ unit, it shall have two distinct identities with separate books of accounts, but it is not necessary for the SEZ unit to be a separate legal entity. Rule 22 outlines the terms and conditions for availing exemptions, drawbacks, and concessions, requiring units to maintain proper accounts and submit Annual Performance Reports.4. Separate Identity of SEZ Units:The court emphasized that statutory provisions create an artificially independent existence for SEZ units, even if the same legal entity has units in both SEZ and DTA. Rule 19(7) mandates distinct identities with separate books of accounts for SEZ and DTA units. This separation is crucial for maintaining the special concessions and exemptions granted to SEZ units.5. Principle of Mutuality and Service Tax:The court rejected the respondent's contention that services rendered by its SEZ unit to its DTA unit should not be chargeable to service tax on the principle of mutuality. The court reasoned that applying this principle would undermine the artificial separation of SEZ units for accounting and taxation purposes. The concept of mutuality applies to groups creating services for themselves, not to commercial transactions between SEZ and DTA units.6. Value of Taxable Services:Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994, requires the ascertainment of the value of taxable services for levying service tax. The court noted that service tax can only be levied if the service provided carries a certain value. If no value is charged for the service, there would be no occasion for collecting service tax. The court found no provision in the Finance Act, 1994, that allows levying service tax on a deemed value if no charge is collected.7. No Charge for Services Provided:The court acknowledged the respondent's claim that the SEZ unit did not collect any charge for services provided to the DTA unit, and invoices were raised merely for convenience. The court concluded that no service tax could be levied as the services provided carried no actual value.Conclusion:The court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, clarifying that no service tax was leviable since the SEZ unit of the respondent had not charged for the services provided to its DTA unit. The appeals were dismissed on the grounds that the SEZ unit and DTA unit, while having distinct identities for accounting purposes, did not engage in taxable transactions that warranted the imposition of service tax.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found