https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271553 Refund under Notification No. 9/2009-ST for SEZ-related services was treated as a facilitative procedural mechanism, so denial for non-submission of the approved list of specified services was not sustainable because that requirement could not override the substantive exemption benefit. The notification was also read as permitting extension of time, and a short, non-unreasonable delay in filing the refund claim was condonable. The refund rejection was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271553 Refund under Notification No. 9/2009-ST for SEZ-related services was treated as a facilitative procedural mechanism, so denial for non-submission of the approved list of specified services was not sustainable because that requirement could not override the substantive exemption benefit. The notification was also read as permitting extension of time, and a short, non-unreasonable delay in filing the refund claim was condonable. The refund rejection was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271553