Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Tega Industries Limited Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : Service Tax Appeal No.11359 of 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 17/06/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Tega Industries Limited Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

This ruling sets a precedent for enterprises operating in both DTA and SEZ, emphasizing their distinct identities and reinforcing the importance of procedural conditions not being absolute barriers to legitimate refunds.

CESTAT observed that Business Support Service is clearly included in the list approved by the approval committee. CESTAT also find that even if it is assumed that the service falls under marketing service and same is not included in the approval list even then for this being a procedure lapse refund cannot be denied. This has been held in various judgments as cited by the Learned Counsel. In the case of Mast Global Business Service India Pvt. Ltd (Supra), the CESTAT Bangalore has passed the following order:-

“6.1… The other grounds on which the refund claims have been rejected by the impugned order is that the appellant has not produced the approved list of specified input services from the UAC SE2 which is mandatory and as per the Commissioner (Appeals). In reply to this argument, the Learned consel submitted that in view of the settled legal position by various decisions relied upon by him, condition in respect of approval from UAC not a mandatory requirement as the SEZ Act vide Section 51 of SEZ Act will have overriding effect over the provisions of other law. Therefore keeping in view the of the intention of the Government in enacting the SEZ Act and giving special fiscal concessions SEZs, I am of the considered opinion that this is only a procedural and is not a mandatory condition as held by the Commissioner (Appeals). Further the decisions relied upon by the appellant clearly held that the SEZ Act has an overriding effect over other laws. Therefore this ground on the basis of which refund claims have been rejected is not tenable in low.”

From the above order along with other decision cited by the appellant merely for the reason that the service is not included in the approved list the refund cannot be denied.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031