https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347666 Refund of service tax paid under reverse charge on input services used for SEZ authorised operations could not be denied merely because approval of those services was obtained after the tax was discharged. The governing SEZ refund notification did not require prior inclusion of the services in the approved list before procurement, and the decisive factor was whether the services were received and consumed for authorised SEZ operations. In light of the SEZ regime's overriding objective of relieving authorised operations from tax burden, a procedural timing objection could not defeat substantive refund entitlement. The rejection of refund was therefore unsustainable. en-us Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Sep 2017 07:00:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347666 Refund of service tax paid under reverse charge on input services used for SEZ authorised operations could not be denied merely because approval of those services was obtained after the tax was discharged. The governing SEZ refund notification did not require prior inclusion of the services in the approved list before procurement, and the decisive factor was whether the services were received and consumed for authorised SEZ operations. In light of the SEZ regime's overriding objective of relieving authorised operations from tax burden, a procedural timing objection could not defeat substantive refund entitlement. The rejection of refund was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347666