https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356025 The appeal was partly allowed for the gardening services refund claim but rejected for the fencing services refund claim. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant for the gardening services refund due to the absence of a green belt maintenance requirement in the permission granted by the Pollution Control Board. However, the rejection for fencing services was upheld based on the lack of correlation with the appellant's exported services. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:02:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356025 The appeal was partly allowed for the gardening services refund claim but rejected for the fencing services refund claim. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant for the gardening services refund due to the absence of a green belt maintenance requirement in the permission granted by the Pollution Control Board. However, the rejection for fencing services was upheld based on the lack of correlation with the appellant's exported services. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356025