<?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 (6) TMI 1157 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362330</link>
    <description>The tribunal held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it arose from an audit objection and compliance, not at the time of payment of Service Tax. The appellant&#039;s belief in paying tax on 100% gross value was considered bonafide, and the refund claim was filed within one year of the audit objection and compliance. The tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the claim, directing verification of unjust enrichment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jun 2018 12:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=524606" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 1157 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362330</link>
      <description>The tribunal held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it arose from an audit objection and compliance, not at the time of payment of Service Tax. The appellant&#039;s belief in paying tax on 100% gross value was considered bonafide, and the refund claim was filed within one year of the audit objection and compliance. The tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the claim, directing verification of unjust enrichment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>