<?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 (6) TMI 1109 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344838</link>
    <description>Receipt of service consideration in Indian rupees routed through a foreign bank and supported by FIRC was treated as receipt in convertible foreign exchange for refund purposes under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with the Export of Service Rules, 2005. The settled FEMA-based position applied was that routing through banking channels from abroad can satisfy the foreign exchange condition despite payment being reflected in rupees, so refund could not be denied on that ground. Denial of refund for security and air travel services was also unsustainable because the objection was not raised in the show cause notice and both services had a direct nexus with the exported output services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 13:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=476109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 1109 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344838</link>
      <description>Receipt of service consideration in Indian rupees routed through a foreign bank and supported by FIRC was treated as receipt in convertible foreign exchange for refund purposes under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with the Export of Service Rules, 2005. The settled FEMA-based position applied was that routing through banking channels from abroad can satisfy the foreign exchange condition despite payment being reflected in rupees, so refund could not be denied on that ground. Denial of refund for security and air travel services was also unsustainable because the objection was not raised in the show cause notice and both services had a direct nexus with the exported output services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344838</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>