https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261710 The appellant's refund claims for March 2009 were initially rejected due to discrepancies in the ST-3 return, but the rejection was deemed unsustainable, and the order was set aside. Additionally, services like Event Management and Club House were contested but ultimately deemed essential for business operations, aligning with the Ultratech Cement case precedent. Refund claims for subsequent months were allowed, and a remand was ordered to verify actual Service Tax payments. Appeals ST/391 and 392/11 were allowed, while ST/390/11 was remanded for detailed assessment within 30 days. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:48:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261710 The appellant's refund claims for March 2009 were initially rejected due to discrepancies in the ST-3 return, but the rejection was deemed unsustainable, and the order was set aside. Additionally, services like Event Management and Club House were contested but ultimately deemed essential for business operations, aligning with the Ultratech Cement case precedent. Refund claims for subsequent months were allowed, and a remand was ordered to verify actual Service Tax payments. Appeals ST/391 and 392/11 were allowed, while ST/390/11 was remanded for detailed assessment within 30 days. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261710