2018 (12) TMI 1189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nit. 4. Appellant herein, during the period in question from 01.04.2011 to 30.06.2012 rendered the services of Tour Operator Services/Rent-a-cab service to EI Dupont Services India Pvt. Ltd. The said EI Dupont Services India Limited was an unit situated and functioned as an SEZ and are entitled to receive authorised services as per the letter from the Development Commissioner. The said letter indicates M/s EI Dupont is entitled to receive tour operator services wherein the description of the services is indicated as "Renting cabs for transport service" along with heading falling under section 65 (105) and the reasoning given is for transport of employees for business purposes. This letter is signed by the Development Commissioner authori....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....who was supposed to follow the provisions of the law, which he did not do so, would not mean that appellant should be saddled with the service tax liability. Identical issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Reliance Ports and Terminals Ltd. Vs. CCE, Rajkot [(2015) 49 GST 630 (CESTAT-AHD.)] and the Bench in that case, following the law laid down by the Tribunal in the case of TATA Consultancy Services Limited, Sujana Metal Products Limited and Intas Pharma Limited held that no service tax liability arises on the service provider. Relevant paras of the said judgment are reproduced. "5. Heard both sides in detail and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is whether service provider is entitled to exemption from paym....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....perationalized the exemption provided. Para 11 of the above judgment is reproduced below: "On true and fair construction of Notifications 9/2009 and 15/2009 issued under Section 93(1) of the Act, considered in the light of overarching "11. provisions of Section 7 and 26(e) of the 2005 Act, the conclusion appears compelling that neither Notification 9/2009 nor 15/2009 disentitle immunity to Service Tax enjoined by the provisions of the 2005 Act. It therefore appears that Notification Nos. 9/2009 and 15/2009 merely contour the process by which the benefit of exemption/immunity to tax is operationalized. Notification Nos. 9/2009 and 15/2009 have provided a facilitative regime whereby a developer or units of SEZ, as recipients of taxab....