https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340108 The appeal against the rejection of a rebate claim by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the Export of Services Rules, 2005 was successful. The Member (Judicial) found that the rebate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by considering input credit eligibility, which was not required under Notification No. 11/2005-ST. As service export and tax payment were undisputed, the rejection of a portion of the rebate claim was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the rebate rejection of &8377; 13,13,605/- was set aside, allowing the appeal with possible consequential reliefs. en-us Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:16:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340108 The appeal against the rejection of a rebate claim by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the Export of Services Rules, 2005 was successful. The Member (Judicial) found that the rebate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by considering input credit eligibility, which was not required under Notification No. 11/2005-ST. As service export and tax payment were undisputed, the rejection of a portion of the rebate claim was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the rebate rejection of &8377; 13,13,605/- was set aside, allowing the appeal with possible consequential reliefs. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340108