https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369287 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding the appellant entitled to the rebate claim for Service Tax on input services used for exporting yarn. The Tribunal considered the retrospective effect of the amendment in Notification No.1/2016, which clarified the scope of specified services to include those used beyond the factory for export. Relying on relevant case law and the retrospective nature of the amendment, the Tribunal set aside the previous rejection, granting the appellant the benefit of the rebate and directing consequential relief in their favor. en-us Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:13:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369287 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding the appellant entitled to the rebate claim for Service Tax on input services used for exporting yarn. The Tribunal considered the retrospective effect of the amendment in Notification No.1/2016, which clarified the scope of specified services to include those used beyond the factory for export. Relying on relevant case law and the retrospective nature of the amendment, the Tribunal set aside the previous rejection, granting the appellant the benefit of the rebate and directing consequential relief in their favor. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369287