<?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 (11) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267977</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to claim the rebate under notification No. 41/2012-ST for services availed beyond the place of removal, ICD Loni, including terminal handling charges, CHA services, banking and financial services, Clearing and Forwarding Agents services, and sterilizing or fumigation of containers services. The appellant&#039;s claim was initially denied on the basis that the services were availed before the port of export, but after analyzing relevant circulars and notifications, the Tribunal concluded that the services were indeed utilized beyond the place of removal, thus allowing the appeal and granting consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405531" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267977</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to claim the rebate under notification No. 41/2012-ST for services availed beyond the place of removal, ICD Loni, including terminal handling charges, CHA services, banking and financial services, Clearing and Forwarding Agents services, and sterilizing or fumigation of containers services. The appellant&#039;s claim was initially denied on the basis that the services were availed before the port of export, but after analyzing relevant circulars and notifications, the Tribunal concluded that the services were indeed utilized beyond the place of removal, thus allowing the appeal and granting consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>