<?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 (9) TMI 686 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332425</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the appellant a refund of &amp;amp;8377; 3,06,175/- due to the unjustified rejection of a portion of the refund amount and the incorrect application of the refund calculation formula. The Tribunal found certain input services essential for business operations and eligible for refund, overturning the rejection for those services. The impugned order rejecting the refund was set aside, providing relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 08:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 686 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332425</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the appellant a refund of &amp;amp;8377; 3,06,175/- due to the unjustified rejection of a portion of the refund amount and the incorrect application of the refund calculation formula. The Tribunal found certain input services essential for business operations and eligible for refund, overturning the rejection for those services. The impugned order rejecting the refund was set aside, providing relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>