<?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>2017 (1) TMI 1136 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338056</link>
    <description>Refund under the export incentive notification could not be rejected as time-barred where the claim was filed within the extended limitation period in the later notification and the other conditions were satisfied. Service tax paid under Technical Testing and Analysis Services was eligible for refund because that category was specifically covered by the notification, and refund could not be denied merely because the underlying activity was composite. Loading and unloading charges, together with wharfage charges, were also eligible as port services where the work was performed within the port by an authorised provider. The denial of refund on all disputed components was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 17:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=456235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1136 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338056</link>
      <description>Refund under the export incentive notification could not be rejected as time-barred where the claim was filed within the extended limitation period in the later notification and the other conditions were satisfied. Service tax paid under Technical Testing and Analysis Services was eligible for refund because that category was specifically covered by the notification, and refund could not be denied merely because the underlying activity was composite. Loading and unloading charges, together with wharfage charges, were also eligible as port services where the work was performed within the port by an authorised provider. The denial of refund on all disputed components was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>