https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341258 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the rejection of the refund claim was unjustified. The demand for the Bank Realisation Certificate (BRC) was deemed erroneous as it was not applicable to services exports. Similarly, the requirement for SOFTEX returns for services was found to be legally unfounded. Consequently, the rejection of the refund claim was set aside, and the appellant was granted the refund, with their appeals allowed along with any necessary reliefs. en-us Tue, 21 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341258 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the rejection of the refund claim was unjustified. The demand for the Bank Realisation Certificate (BRC) was deemed erroneous as it was not applicable to services exports. Similarly, the requirement for SOFTEX returns for services was found to be legally unfounded. Consequently, the rejection of the refund claim was set aside, and the appellant was granted the refund, with their appeals allowed along with any necessary reliefs. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 21 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341258