TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 258
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r : Shri O.P. Agarwal, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri Rajeev Gupta, Commissioner( A.R.) ORDER PER R.K. SINGH: These appeals are filed against rejection of refund claims of Rs. 51,298/- and Rs. 45,052/- in case of Makers Mart and Rs. 62,109/- in case of Prince Exports. The refund claims were filed in terms of Notification No. 9/2009 ST, dated 03.03.2009. 2. Rejection of the refund of Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... application for refund in terms of para 2 (g) (i) of Notification No. 9/2009ST which was not submitted. As regards the refund of Rs. 62,109/-, it was rejected on the ground of non-submission of list of specified services required in relation to the authorised operations in SEZ as approved by the Approval Committee which was required to be submitted along with the application for refund in terms o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the approved list of authorised operations which is a condition in notification No. 9/2009 - ST , we find that the issue has been discussed and analysed and settled in favour of the asessees in the case of Intas Pharma (supra) wherein it was held that under : 11. On true and fair construction of Notifications 9/2009 and 15/2009 issued under Section 93(1) of the Act, considered in the light o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t cannot be so interpreted as to be eclipsed the procedural prescriptions of Notification No. 9/2009 or 15/2009. These Notifications are calibrated to enable recipients of taxable services (exempt from liability to tax under the provisions of the 2005 Act), to claim refund of the Service Tax, wherever assessed and collected by Revenue or remitted otherwise by the taxable service provider, inadvert....