<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (12) TMI 299 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203388</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax was confined to the exporter who availed and used the input services for export of goods. The benefit was not available to a different person, including the manufacturer supplying the goods, unless the notification expressly conferred such entitlement. On that construction, the manufacturer could not claim refund of tax paid on services used by the merchant exporter, and the refund claims failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 299 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203388</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax was confined to the exporter who availed and used the input services for export of goods. The benefit was not available to a different person, including the manufacturer supplying the goods, unless the notification expressly conferred such entitlement. On that construction, the manufacturer could not claim refund of tax paid on services used by the merchant exporter, and the refund claims failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203388</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>