https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361146 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the refund claim due to the lack of export during the claimed quarter, as mandated by the notification. The appellant was found non-compliant with the conditions for the refund. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on the objections regarding renting of immovable property as an input service and the validity of filing one refund claim for multiple quarters. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the necessity of export during the claimed quarter for refund eligibility. en-us Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 May 2018 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361146 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the refund claim due to the lack of export during the claimed quarter, as mandated by the notification. The appellant was found non-compliant with the conditions for the refund. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on the objections regarding renting of immovable property as an input service and the validity of filing one refund claim for multiple quarters. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the necessity of export during the claimed quarter for refund eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361146