<?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>2011 (8) TMI 274 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205942</link>
    <description>Refund of terminal handling charges could not be finally rejected on a factual and legal basis different from the show cause notice and the original order. The dispute turned on the true nature of the service received, including whether it was correctly treated as business support service or as port service, and the record did not clearly establish that issue. Because the appellate rejection proceeded on a new footing without proper verification of the documents and facts, the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the refund dispute was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 03:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 274 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205942</link>
      <description>Refund of terminal handling charges could not be finally rejected on a factual and legal basis different from the show cause notice and the original order. The dispute turned on the true nature of the service received, including whether it was correctly treated as business support service or as port service, and the record did not clearly establish that issue. Because the appellate rejection proceeded on a new footing without proper verification of the documents and facts, the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the refund dispute was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>