<?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 (12) TMI 386 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335741</link>
    <description>Refund under Notification No. 17/2009-ST was conditional on non-availment of CENVAT credit on the specified input services used for exports. Where the record showed that the assessee had taken CENVAT credit of service tax paid on taxable services during the relevant period, and no material established compliance with the notification conditions, the refund claim could not be sustained. On that basis, the rejection of the refund claims was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2016 17:30:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=450964" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 386 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335741</link>
      <description>Refund under Notification No. 17/2009-ST was conditional on non-availment of CENVAT credit on the specified input services used for exports. Where the record showed that the assessee had taken CENVAT credit of service tax paid on taxable services during the relevant period, and no material established compliance with the notification conditions, the refund claim could not be sustained. On that basis, the rejection of the refund claims was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>