<?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>2018 (2) TMI 725 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355304</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax paid on input services used in relation to export was held admissible under Notification No. 17/2009-ST where the documentary record sufficiently linked the services to the export consignments. The appellate authority relied on the certificate, the chart correlating shipping bills with bills of lading or airway bills, and the service-provider invoices to find that the services were used for export purposes. Defects such as the absence of invoice numbers or shipping bill numbers on the invoices, and objections about service descriptions, were treated as adequately explained by the evidence on record. Revenue produced no material to rebut these findings, so the refund claim was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 06:17:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508726" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 725 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355304</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax paid on input services used in relation to export was held admissible under Notification No. 17/2009-ST where the documentary record sufficiently linked the services to the export consignments. The appellate authority relied on the certificate, the chart correlating shipping bills with bills of lading or airway bills, and the service-provider invoices to find that the services were used for export purposes. Defects such as the absence of invoice numbers or shipping bill numbers on the invoices, and objections about service descriptions, were treated as adequately explained by the evidence on record. Revenue produced no material to rebut these findings, so the refund claim was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355304</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>