https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249292 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing refund claims within one year of receiving consideration, as opposed to the date of export, emphasizing the importance of the date of payment for services. The eligibility of CENVAT credit for various services was upheld, except for construction services, which were deemed admissible. The lower authorities' decisions were set aside, and the matters were remanded for fresh consideration, granting the appellant an opportunity to present their case if any part of the refund was proposed for rejection. The judgment highlighted the significance of the date of consideration receipt in determining refund claim admissibility. en-us Wed, 21 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Oct 2015 10:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249292 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing refund claims within one year of receiving consideration, as opposed to the date of export, emphasizing the importance of the date of payment for services. The eligibility of CENVAT credit for various services was upheld, except for construction services, which were deemed admissible. The lower authorities' decisions were set aside, and the matters were remanded for fresh consideration, granting the appellant an opportunity to present their case if any part of the refund was proposed for rejection. The judgment highlighted the significance of the date of consideration receipt in determining refund claim admissibility. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 21 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249292