https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360001 Service tax exemption for taxable services used in authorised SEZ operations was held to flow from the SEZ Act and SEZ Rules, and not to be curtailed by additional conditions in Notification No. 9/2009-ST or Notification No. 15/2009-ST. Section 26(1)(e) grants exemption for services provided to a developer or unit for authorised operations, while Section 26(2) and Rule 31 regulate the manner of extending that exemption. Because the SEZ Act has overriding effect under Section 51, inconsistent conditions under the Finance Act regime could not defeat the refund claim. The refund denial based on those notification conditions was therefore unsustainable and set aside. en-us Fri, 04 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2018 08:04:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360001 Service tax exemption for taxable services used in authorised SEZ operations was held to flow from the SEZ Act and SEZ Rules, and not to be curtailed by additional conditions in Notification No. 9/2009-ST or Notification No. 15/2009-ST. Section 26(1)(e) grants exemption for services provided to a developer or unit for authorised operations, while Section 26(2) and Rule 31 regulate the manner of extending that exemption. Because the SEZ Act has overriding effect under Section 51, inconsistent conditions under the Finance Act regime could not defeat the refund claim. The refund denial based on those notification conditions was therefore unsustainable and set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 04 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360001