<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (4) TMI 523 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789454</link>
    <description>Substantive service tax exemption for supplies to SEZ units or developers cannot be denied merely for non-furnishing of prescribed notification conditions and documents if the supply is otherwise established under section 26 of the SEZ Act, 2005; however, the factual question whether the services were actually supplied to SEZ units or developers had to be verified again, so the exemption issue required fresh adjudication. The alleged short payment also had to be re-determined because the lower stage had not properly examined cum-tax benefit and the correct valuation or abatement method. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication on both issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895924" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 523 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789454</link>
      <description>Substantive service tax exemption for supplies to SEZ units or developers cannot be denied merely for non-furnishing of prescribed notification conditions and documents if the supply is otherwise established under section 26 of the SEZ Act, 2005; however, the factual question whether the services were actually supplied to SEZ units or developers had to be verified again, so the exemption issue required fresh adjudication. The alleged short payment also had to be re-determined because the lower stage had not properly examined cum-tax benefit and the correct valuation or abatement method. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication on both issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789454</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>