https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337469 The judgment confirmed the service recipient's entitlement to claim a refund of service tax if the tax burden was not passed on, citing relevant case law. It clarified that the jurisdiction for filing a refund application was at the discretion of the appellant. The time limitation for filing the refund claim was deemed met based on the issuance of credit notes by the service provider. The appellant successfully demonstrated non-passing of the tax burden, overcoming the doctrine of unjust enrichment presumption. The appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellant, directing the Assistant Commissioner to process the refund claim. en-us Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Sep 2017 14:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337469 The judgment confirmed the service recipient's entitlement to claim a refund of service tax if the tax burden was not passed on, citing relevant case law. It clarified that the jurisdiction for filing a refund application was at the discretion of the appellant. The time limitation for filing the refund claim was deemed met based on the issuance of credit notes by the service provider. The appellant successfully demonstrated non-passing of the tax burden, overcoming the doctrine of unjust enrichment presumption. The appeals were disposed of in favor of the appellant, directing the Assistant Commissioner to process the refund claim. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337469