Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether refund of service tax paid on input services used for authorized operations in a Special Economic Zone could be denied on the ground of limitation prescribed in the service tax exemption notification.
Analysis: The appellant was a co-developer in a Special Economic Zone and had paid service tax on input services used for authorized operations. The claim for refund was rejected only because it was filed beyond one year under the notification governing refund. The governing legal position, as applied in the order, is that the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 grants exemption for such services and operates with overriding effect over the Finance Act, 1994 and the notifications issued thereunder. Once the levy itself is displaced for authorized SEZ operations, the procedural conditions and time-limit in the exemption notification cannot defeat the substantive entitlement to refund. Amounts paid as service tax in such circumstances are not sustainable collections and are refundable.
Conclusion: The appellant was held entitled to refund of service tax, and rejection on the ground of limitation was held unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where service tax is paid on services used for authorized SEZ operations, the exemption under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 prevails over conditions and limitation in service tax exemption notifications issued under the Finance Act, 1994.