https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756883 Employee transport between residence and an SEZ workplace was treated as Rent-a-Cab Service because the activity involved conveyance only and had no element of tour planning or scheduling, so it was not Tour Operator Service. The appellant also qualified for exemption for services supplied to the SEZ unit, as the transport was integrally connected with the SEZ recipient's operations and was treated as consumed within the SEZ. The SEZ Act's exemption framework and its overriding effect under Section 51 prevailed over any inconsistent restrictive conditions in the notification, and the amended Notification No. 9/2009-ST did not defeat the benefit for the disputed period. en-us Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756883 Employee transport between residence and an SEZ workplace was treated as Rent-a-Cab Service because the activity involved conveyance only and had no element of tour planning or scheduling, so it was not Tour Operator Service. The appellant also qualified for exemption for services supplied to the SEZ unit, as the transport was integrally connected with the SEZ recipient's operations and was treated as consumed within the SEZ. The SEZ Act's exemption framework and its overriding effect under Section 51 prevailed over any inconsistent restrictive conditions in the notification, and the amended Notification No. 9/2009-ST did not defeat the benefit for the disputed period. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756883