TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeals allowed for service tax refund on industrial land lease payments. Section 104 retrospective application rejected.</h1> The appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as the Bench found that the appellants provided sufficient documents to prove the payment of service ... Refund of service tax - taking industrial lands on long term lease from Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (KINFRA) by paying an upfront amount on long term lease - insertion of Section 104 into Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 with retrospective effect - HELD THAT:- The issue involved has been answered in favour of the taxpayer by this Bench in the case of COMFORT NIGHT LINEN PRODUCTS AND PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND ENGINEERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX & CENTRAL EXCISE, CALICUT [2021 (8) TMI 169 - CESTAT BANGALORE] where it was held that I find that these bills/invoices issued by KINFRA clearly show the payment of service tax by the appellant to KINFRA and KINFRA in turn has paid the same to the Government. Though these invoices/bills were not produced before the Original Authority but various Challans issued by KINFRA were produced along with worksheets showing the payment of service tax to KINFRA by the appellants. The assertions of both the parties are correct, inasmuch, as the issue involved in these appeals has been answered by this Bench for which reason, the impugned orders cannot be sustained - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:Appeals against Orders-in-Appeal related to refund of service tax on long term lease of industrial lands.Analysis:The appeals were filed against Orders-in-Appeal dated 05/04/2021 and 13/07/2020 passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs, Cochin. The appellants had taken industrial lands on long term lease from Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (KINFRA) by paying an upfront amount with service tax. The introduction of Section 104 into Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 with retrospective effect led to refund requests for the service tax paid on the upfront amount. The rejection of the refund requests was challenged in the present appeals.Both parties agreed that a similar issue was resolved in favor of the taxpayer in a previous case by the Bench. The Bench found that the refund claims arose due to the introduction of Section 104 of the Finance Act. Notification No. 41/2016 exempted taxable services provided by State Government Industrial Development Corporation from service tax on long term lease of industrial plots. The Bench noted that the appellants filed refund claims within the stipulated time and submitted invoices/bills showing payment of service tax to KINFRA. Despite these documents not being produced before the Original Authority, various challans and worksheets demonstrated the payment of service tax.The Bench concluded that since the appellants provided sufficient documents to prove the payment of service tax, there was no justification for rejecting the refund claims. Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law. The orders were pronounced in the Open Court on 01/04/2022.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
