2024 (8) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ansportation of their employees from their residence to workplace for which they received payment from the said company. The appellant had not paid service tax on payments received from the said company on the ground that the said company was an SEZ unit and, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of tax exemption under Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The Department was of the view that the services provided by the appellant is in the nature of Tour Operator Services and not Rent-a-Cab Services. Further, it was observed by the Department that since the transportation has taken place outside the SEZ zone also, the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The Show Cause Notice d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....omer is an SEZ unit, and the appellant has provided services to the SEZ company. Merely because, the employees were residing outside the SEZ zone from where they were transported to their workplace situated in SEZ zone, it cannot be said that the services are not consumed within the SEZ zone. The Ld. Counsel referred to Section 26 as well as Section 51 of Special Economic Zone Act, 2005. It is submitted that Section 26 exempts an assessee from all taxes / duties while providing services to SEZ. Section 51 states that the SEZ Act would have over riding effect over any of the law for the time being force. The decision of the Hon'ble High of Andhra Pradesh in the case of GMR Aerospace Engineering Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2019 (31) GSTL 596 (AP....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../2004-ST dated 31.03.2004. The appellant had accounted the entire transactions in their accounts. The demand has been raised on the basis of such accounts. There are no ingredients for invoking extended period and the demand may set aside for this reason also. The Ld. Counsel prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 3. The Ld. Authorised Representative Shri Harendra Singh Pal appeared and argued for the Department. Paragraph 12 of the impugned order was referred to by the Ld. AR. It is submitted that Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004 specifically uses the words 'services consumed within the SEZ'. The said condition was amended by Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 which stated that the exemption would be eligible whether o....