Topic

SEZ Act

6 articlesLatest September 2026
Limitation period cannot defeat SEZ exemption for service tax refunds | SEZ unit claim : CESTAT (Hyderabad)
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Limitation period cannot defeat SEZ exemption for service tax refunds | SEZ unit claim : CESTAT (Hyderabad)

A SEZ unit’s claim for service tax refund was allowed despite filing beyond the six-month limit, because the SEZ Act’s substantive exemption prevails over procedural time bars. This clarifies that revenue authorities cannot reject refunds solely on limitation grounds for SEZ entities. The ruling benefits all SEZ manufacturers seeking tax refunds for pre-2011 periods.

SEZ Unit Refund Claims Exempt from 1-Year Limitation under Notification 40/2012-ST | CESTAT Chandigarh
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

SEZ Unit Refund Claims Exempt from 1-Year Limitation under Notification 40/2012-ST | CESTAT Chandigarh

CESTAT Chandigarh holds that Special Economic Zone units are not bound by the one-year limitation period in Finance Act notifications for service tax refunds, as their entitlement arises from statutory exemption provisions under the SEZ Act. This clarifies that SEZ-specific refund rights operate independently of general time bars, benefiting exporters and SEZ-based service recipients with delayed claims.

SEZ Act Notification 12/2013-ST | Refund Cannot Be Denied for Procedural Invoice Defects When Authorized Use Is Proven : CESTAT Hyderabad
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

SEZ Act Notification 12/2013-ST | Refund Cannot Be Denied for Procedural Invoice Defects When Authorized Use Is Proven : CESTAT Hyderabad

CESTAT Hyderabad rules that technical invoice flaws - such as mismatched addresses or missing originals - cannot override a SEZ unit’s substantiated claim for service tax refund, provided the services were received, paid for, and used in authorized operations. This reinforces the principle of purposive interpretation in SEZ incentives, protecting genuine beneficiaries from bureaucratic overreach.

SEZ Act Section 26(1)(e) | Customs Duty Exemption for SEZ Supplies Mandatory; Penalty Quashed for Violating Natural Justice : CESTAT
Case Law Analysis
|Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

SEZ Act Section 26(1)(e) | Customs Duty Exemption for SEZ Supplies Mandatory; Penalty Quashed for Violating Natural Justice : CESTAT

CESTAT rules that supplies to SEZ units under Section 26(1)(e) of the SEZ Act are exempt from customs duty, and any penalty imposed without proper notice or evidence violates principles of natural justice. The tribunal set aside a ₹72 lakh demand, reinforcing that procedural fairness is non-negotiable in duty exemption cases affecting traders and SEZ operators.