2018 (12) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r No. 21864-21866/2018<br>Service Tax<br>MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER And MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER Harish Bindumadhavan, For the Appellant Mr. Pakshirajan, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per: P. ANJANI KUMAR Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a registered unit under the provisions of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner (A) seeking refund on the ground that in terms of Section 51 of SEZ Act, the provisions of Section 51 of SEZ Act would have an overriding effect over any other law in India and the intention of the legislator was to exempt the services received by the SEZ unit from levy of Service Tax. The appellants have received the services for discharge of authorized operations and have fulfilled all the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... provisions applicable. Moreover, the impugned order has been passed without giving an opportunity of being heard in violation of the principles of natural justice. In their support, he relied upon the following case laws: (i) Baraka Overseas Traders Vs. DGFT - 2006 (202) ELT 003 (SC). (ii) Mardia Steel Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2000 (121) ELT 48 (Tri. Del.). (iii) Madhumilan Syntex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UO....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ST dated 01.07.2013. The learned Commissioner has considered the refund claims under the provisions of Rule 5 of CCR read with Notification No. 05/2006 dated 14.03.2006 whereas the refund claim was not filed under Rule 5 of CCR. 5. We find that this Bench vide Final Order No. 20412-20418 dated 12.03.2018 has remanded similar set of appeals back to the Commissioner (A) for re-consideration. This....