https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370077 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both appeals, allowing the refund claims initially rejected. The misclassification of services by the service provider did not invalidate the refund claim, and the rejection based on being time-barred was deemed unjustified due to compliance with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal emphasized the significance of correct service classification and adherence to prescribed time limits for refund claims under the relevant notification. en-us Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Nov 2018 19:02:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370077 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both appeals, allowing the refund claims initially rejected. The misclassification of services by the service provider did not invalidate the refund claim, and the rejection based on being time-barred was deemed unjustified due to compliance with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal emphasized the significance of correct service classification and adherence to prescribed time limits for refund claims under the relevant notification. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370077