<?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 (10) TMI 30 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251896</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax paid on construction services for educational institutions was allowed because the record showed no separate collection of tax from the recipients. The construction activity was treated as exempt under the applicable Board circular for buildings used by institutions established solely for educational purposes, and the Revenue failed to prove that the tax burden had been passed on. In the absence of any bill entry or contractual term indicating recovery of tax from the educational institutions, no presumption of unjust enrichment arose. The refund of excess service tax, with interest, was therefore payable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2014 07:24:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 30 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251896</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax paid on construction services for educational institutions was allowed because the record showed no separate collection of tax from the recipients. The construction activity was treated as exempt under the applicable Board circular for buildings used by institutions established solely for educational purposes, and the Revenue failed to prove that the tax burden had been passed on. In the absence of any bill entry or contractual term indicating recovery of tax from the educational institutions, no presumption of unjust enrichment arose. The refund of excess service tax, with interest, was therefore payable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251896</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>