Export-of-services exemption and registration allocation determined to require fresh adjudication after cancellation of redundant registration.

Dispute centred on whether service tax, interest and penalty could attach where the taxpayer had changed its name, claimed SEZ export exemption, and a second service-tax registration existed. The court required the adjudicating authority to apply independent mind to documents reflecting the name change and to determine whether the transactions fall within exports from the SEZ-if so, liability under the second registration does not properly attach; accordingly the prior order was set aside and the matter remitted. The taxpayer was directed to cancel the second registration within four weeks and the authority to complete fresh adjudication within a defined short timeframe, without costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order-in-original dated 21.08.2025 confirming service tax, interest and penalty against the petitioner (for tax periods 2016-17 and 2017-18 up to June 2017) could be sustained where (i) the petitioner had undergone a change of name, (ii) claimed exemption for export of services under special economic zone arrangements, and (iii) there existed a second service tax registration which the petitioner was directed to cancel.

Analysis: The proceedings involved two registrations and alleged undeclared taxable receipts attributable to the second registration. The adjudicating authority's treatment of documents filed in the name reflecting the changed corporate name was examined in the context of whether the authority applied independent mind to the name change and the petitioner's claim of exemption for export of services under SEZ-related law. The relevance of non-filing under the second registration, the question of invocation of extended limitation on the basis of alleged willful suppression, and the availability of statutory appellate remedy were addressed. It was observed that if the transactions relevantly relate to the first registration and exports from SEZ, liability under the second registration would not properly attach; accordingly, the matter required fresh consideration after the petitioner places relevant materials and takes steps to cancel the second registration so that adjudication proceeds on correct factual and legal basis. Directions were given for cancellation of the second registration within a specified time and for completion of fresh adjudication within a reasonable timeline after such steps.

Conclusion: The impugned order-in-original dated 21.08.2025 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after considering the materials placed by the petitioner and upon cancellation of the second registration; petitioner to cancel the second registration within four weeks and the adjudicating authority to conclude proceedings preferably within eight weeks thereafter. No order as to costs.

---