Substantive SEZ refund entitlement prevails over challan registration mismatch where input services were used for authorised operations.

Refund of service tax on input services used for SEZ authorised operations was held admissible where the services were actually received and consumed by the SEZ unit, even though the challans showed a different registration number and address of the same company. The objection based only on technical mismatch in registration particulars was rejected because the tax burden had not been otherwise availed as credit and the services related to the approved operations. The substantive entitlement to refund was therefore not defeated by the use of another internal registration code within the same corporate entity.

---

---

Issues: Whether the SEZ unit was entitled to refund of service tax paid on input services used for authorised operations, notwithstanding that the tax challans reflected a different registration number and address of the same company.

Analysis: The disputed refund related to input services received during the relevant quarter for which the services were approved for SEZ authorised operations and were shown to have been received and consumed by the appellant. The objection of the Revenue was confined to the fact that the tax had been deposited under another service tax registration of the same company and not under the registration of the SEZ unit. The Tribunal noted that the facts were identical to an earlier period where refund had already been held admissible, and that the mere use of a different code within the same company could not defeat the substantive entitlement where the services were actually used for the SEZ unit and the tax burden had not been otherwise taken credit of.

Conclusion: The refund was held admissible and the disallowance was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the refund issue, and the appellant became entitled to consequential grant of refund with interest as directed.

Ratio Decidendi: A substantive refund entitlement cannot be denied for a technical defect in the registration particulars on the challan where the input services were actually received for authorised operations and the tax payment was made within the same company structure without double benefit.

---