<?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>2013 (7) TMI 124 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234966</link>
    <description>Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was in issue where a 100% EOU exported software-related services and received consideration in convertible foreign exchange. The Tribunal held that credit on input services used for exports cannot be denied merely because the output activity was not taxable during the relevant period, and refund is admissible for accumulated credit arising from export activity; refund was allowed. On limitation, it held that the time bar under s.11B could not be invoked to reject refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5; the limitation objection was rejected. On taxability, it held that the exported activity was not a taxable service during the period as the relevant IT software service category was introduced later; the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2025 16:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 124 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234966</link>
      <description>Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was in issue where a 100% EOU exported software-related services and received consideration in convertible foreign exchange. The Tribunal held that credit on input services used for exports cannot be denied merely because the output activity was not taxable during the relevant period, and refund is admissible for accumulated credit arising from export activity; refund was allowed. On limitation, it held that the time bar under s.11B could not be invoked to reject refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5; the limitation objection was rejected. On taxability, it held that the exported activity was not a taxable service during the period as the relevant IT software service category was introduced later; the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>