2015 (2) TMI 347

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp;   (b) That refund claim for Rs. 21,451/- has been filed beyond the prescribed time limit as per notification No. 9/2009 dt. 3.3.2009. 2. The facts of the case are that appellant is SEZ developers. They availed certain services and paid service tax thereon. As the services were used for authorized operations in the SEZ. Therefore, they filed refund of service tax paid by them. The said refund claims were rejected on the ground that as per Notification No. 15/2009-ST dt. 20.5.2009, if the services are wholly consumed in the SEZ, the same are exempted from payment of service tax. Therefore, appellants are not entitled to take refund of service tax paid by them as service is fully exempted. It is further held that the appellant p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntention of legislation was that if any service tax has been paid by unit which was not required to pay service tax does not mean is not is entitled for refund claim. The intention of the legislature is that the person providing services is not required to pay service tax. Therefore, the Revenue has misinterpreted the notification No. 15/2009 ibid to deny the refund claim. The same issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. Vs. Commr of Ex. & S.T. (LTU), Mumbai reported in 2013 (29) STR 393 (Tri.) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under:           "6.2 Coming to the next question, whether in respect of the services which were wholly consumed and which we....