2023 (9) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y Revenue. During the course of audit, it was noticed by Revenue that the appellant was receiving some amounts towards lease rent and maintenance. Therefore, the financial accounts of the appellant were further scrutinized by Revenue for the period from October 2007 to March 2012 and it was noticed that the appellant was receiving amounts for providing renting of immovable property and maintenance or repair services to various units which were categorized into three categories, viz. units which were not having SEZ status, units which did not have approved list of services and units availing services before the approval was accorded. It appeared to Revenue that the appellant had violated conditions of Notification No. 04/2004-ST dated 31.03.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hrough the impugned order-in-original, the original authority has confirmed the demand of service tax of Rs.25,90,96,248/- and further ordered the appellant to pay interest on the said amount as provided by Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994. Under the provisions of Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994, a penalty of equal amount was imposed on the appellant. Further, a penalty of Rs.10,000/- was imposed on the appellant under Section 77 of Finance Act, 1994 on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the learned Chartered Accountant on behalf of the appellant. Learned Chartered Accountant has submitted that the appellant is an SEZ developer and the Government of India through a Notification dated 13.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted that the original authority in para 15 of the impugned order has observed that the developer and the units in SEZ are entitled to receive tax free goods and services and that the original authority has distinguished the services provided by the developer with the services received by the developer. He has further emphasized that the appellant is providing services and not receiving the services. He has submitted that as per clause (e) of Section 26(1) of SEZ Act, 2005, a unit under SEZ is entitled to receive services without payment of tax. In respect of such units which were not having approval for the list of services, he has submitted that the approval was granted subsequently to the various units and that the notification does not r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ication No. 09/2009 dated 31.03.2009 exempts taxable services which are provided in relation to authorized operations in an SEZ and received by a developer or units of an SEZ. Notification No. 17/2011 exempts taxable service received by a unit located in an SEZ or received by a developer of SEZ. Contention of Revenue is that the conditions of the said notifications were violated by the appellant and, therefore, the appellant was not entitled for the benefits provided under subsection (1) of Section 26 of SEZ Act, 2005. We note that clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section26 of SEZ Act, 2005 provides that every developer and the entrepreneur shall be entitled to the exemption from service tax under Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994 on taxable s....