<?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>2016 (2) TMI 727 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272022</link>
    <description>Limitation for a refund claim under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax runs only from the date the right to refund crystallises, not from the quarter in which exports occurred. Since the service tax was actually paid in October 2008, the refund application filed on 30.03.2009 was within six months and timely. The Revenue&#039;s contention that limitation should be counted from the export quarter was rejected, and the claim was held not barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 727 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272022</link>
      <description>Limitation for a refund claim under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax runs only from the date the right to refund crystallises, not from the quarter in which exports occurred. Since the service tax was actually paid in October 2008, the refund application filed on 30.03.2009 was within six months and timely. The Revenue&#039;s contention that limitation should be counted from the export quarter was rejected, and the claim was held not barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>