<?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>2014 (7) TMI 451 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249414</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision that services provided outside India qualified as exports under Rule 3 (1) (iii) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005. The appeal against the rejection of the refund claim of service tax paid under Business Auxiliary Service was dismissed, as the services were deemed to have been received outside India, benefiting from the export status.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2015 11:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 451 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249414</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision that services provided outside India qualified as exports under Rule 3 (1) (iii) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005. The appeal against the rejection of the refund claim of service tax paid under Business Auxiliary Service was dismissed, as the services were deemed to have been received outside India, benefiting from the export status.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249414</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>