https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214072 Refund under Notification No. 41/2007-ST could not be denied for terminal handling and documentation charges merely because the service provider was allegedly unauthorised or registered under another service category, where there was no clear evidence that the services were ineligible and the circular indicated that such registration alone was not a valid ground for rejection. Refund of service tax on GTA service also could not be finally rejected for omission of export invoice particulars in the lorry receipt, since the defect was curable and the export invoice, factory invoice, ARE-1 and lorry receipt could be reconciled through fresh verification. The rejection was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration. en-us Wed, 02 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214072 Refund under Notification No. 41/2007-ST could not be denied for terminal handling and documentation charges merely because the service provider was allegedly unauthorised or registered under another service category, where there was no clear evidence that the services were ineligible and the circular indicated that such registration alone was not a valid ground for rejection. Refund of service tax on GTA service also could not be finally rejected for omission of export invoice particulars in the lorry receipt, since the defect was curable and the export invoice, factory invoice, ARE-1 and lorry receipt could be reconciled through fresh verification. The rejection was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 02 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214072