TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 971
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidences envisaging duty payment of service tax and required evidences & documents in terms of Notification No. 09/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 20.05.2009 that taxable services provided by the SEZ unit are consumed partially or wholly in the SEZ. The said SCN was disposed of by the adjudicating authority vide impugned order dated 01.02.2010 rejecting the refund claim filed by the Appellant on the ground that the Appellant has not fulfilled the provisions of Notification No. 09/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 20.05.2009. Being aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, appellant filed appeal before the Commr. (A) which was allowed on merit. Therefore, the present appeal filed by the Revenue. 2. Shri S.N. Gohil, Ld. Supdt. (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the grounds of the appeal. He further submits that the refund filed by the respondent is by way of exemption notification no. 09/2009-ST dated 03/03/2009 as amended by notification no. 15/09-ST dated 20/05/2009. As per condition 1(c) of the notification, the refund is applicable only in respect of those services which are partly consum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and perusal of records, we find that the issue being of refund of service tax paid on input service received by the SEZ Unit is no longer resintegra in the light of various judgments passed by this Tribunal. In the case of Sears IT & Management Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) this Tribunal has passed the following judgment: "The fact of the case is that the appellant is SEZ unit they received certain services in their SEZ on payment of Service Tax. They filed refund claim in respect of such in put service under Notification No. 9/2009-ST as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 20.05.2009. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the refunded claim partly and major amount of refund was ejected, on the ground that the services received by the appellants were wholly consumed within the SEZ. Being aggrieved by the order in original the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order upheld the order in original and rejected the appeal. The Ld. Commissioner in his order contended that since the services in question were received by the appellants were consumed whol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt have admittedly claimed the refund under Notification No. 9/2009-ST as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST The Services in respect of which the refund was claimed were consumed wholly within the Special Economic Zone. The exemption Notification No. 9/2009-ST is not application in respect of those services which were consumed wholly within the Special Economic Zone. Therefore both the lower authorities have rightly contended that the refund claim under Notification No. 9/2009-ST is not admissible therefore the order is sustainable and does not enquire any interference. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that the clause (c) to the Notification No. 9/2009-ST as amended by NotIfication No. 15/2009-ST reads as under: "(c) The exemption claimed by the developer or units of Special Economic Zone shall be provided by way of refund of service fax paid on the specified services used in relation to the authorized operations In the Special Economic Zone except for services consumed wholly. within the Special Economic Zone" From the plain reading of the aforesaid clause (c) of the Notification No. 9/2009-ST. it Is clear t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erations in a SEZ. 8. In view of the legislated exemption supra and since provisions of the 2005 Act are provided an overriding effect vide Section 51; and absent any provision in the Act which eclipses the overarching trajectory of the 2005 Act, the immunity to Service Tax in respect of taxable services provided in relation to SEZ is a legislatively enjoined immunity. Therefore, any Service Tax paid/remitted by a service provider is liable to be refunded to the provider who has remitted Service Tax in relation to taxable services provided to a developer or unit, to carry on authorized operations in a SEZ. 9. However, the issue in this case is refund claimed by the petitioner as the recipient of the taxable service of Architect, Interior Decorator and Consulting Engineer, i.e. in respect of those services provided to the appellant by MIs. Venkataramanan Associates. Notification No. 9/2009-S. T., dated 3-3-2009 as earlier adverted to, enables claim of exemption by developers or units in SEZ by way of refund of Service Tax paid for services used in relation to authorized operations in SEZ, insofar as the claim for refund is filed within six months or within such ext....