https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766350 Service tax demand on transportation services supplied to an SEZ unit could not be sustained where the authority relied on an earlier Finance Act notification inconsistent with the exemption under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005. Section 51 of the SEZ Act gives the Act overriding effect, so the section 26 exemption prevails over conflicting earlier notification-based treatment. The Tribunal also reiterated that an adjudicating authority must follow a binding appellate decision on identical facts and cannot ignore it merely because no further appeal was pursued. The demand order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication under the correct statutory framework. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Feb 2025 08:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766350 Service tax demand on transportation services supplied to an SEZ unit could not be sustained where the authority relied on an earlier Finance Act notification inconsistent with the exemption under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005. Section 51 of the SEZ Act gives the Act overriding effect, so the section 26 exemption prevails over conflicting earlier notification-based treatment. The Tribunal also reiterated that an adjudicating authority must follow a binding appellate decision on identical facts and cannot ignore it merely because no further appeal was pursued. The demand order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication under the correct statutory framework. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766350