https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345735 Refund claims under Notification No. 41/2007-ST could not be rejected outright for alleged defects in prescribed documents or corrected charts, as the errors in service descriptions and typographical mistakes were treated as remediable and required reconsideration against the notification scheme and the relevant Board circular. The rejection based on alleged drawback was also not sustained, because the assumption that drawback necessarily covered service tax on outward transportation from ICD to port was found unsupported by facts, and the appellant's specific plea required fresh examination. The disputes were therefore sent back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration after giving the appellant an opportunity to substantiate the refund claim. en-us Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Sep 2017 11:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345735 Refund claims under Notification No. 41/2007-ST could not be rejected outright for alleged defects in prescribed documents or corrected charts, as the errors in service descriptions and typographical mistakes were treated as remediable and required reconsideration against the notification scheme and the relevant Board circular. The rejection based on alleged drawback was also not sustained, because the assumption that drawback necessarily covered service tax on outward transportation from ICD to port was found unsupported by facts, and the appellant's specific plea required fresh examination. The disputes were therefore sent back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration after giving the appellant an opportunity to substantiate the refund claim. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345735