<?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>2015 (10) TMI 2230 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266956</link>
    <description>Refund under the export service exemption notification depends on whether the service actually received falls within the notified export-related category and is supported by the documentary record. Terminal handling and allied export charges were treated as covered by the residual entry, so refund was admissible. Claims described only as clearing and forwarding service or CHA service failed where the invoices did not identify a notified service, so refund was denied on classification. For goods transport agency service, the absence of consignment notes did not defeat refund because transport bills, vehicle numbers and container details matched the exports. CHA invoices routed through another intermediary were also accepted where the export papers and invoices tallied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 2230 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266956</link>
      <description>Refund under the export service exemption notification depends on whether the service actually received falls within the notified export-related category and is supported by the documentary record. Terminal handling and allied export charges were treated as covered by the residual entry, so refund was admissible. Claims described only as clearing and forwarding service or CHA service failed where the invoices did not identify a notified service, so refund was denied on classification. For goods transport agency service, the absence of consignment notes did not defeat refund because transport bills, vehicle numbers and container details matched the exports. CHA invoices routed through another intermediary were also accepted where the export papers and invoices tallied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>