https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372021 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI set aside the rejection of the refund claim by the authorities, ruling in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it was filed within the prescribed period after the amalgamation order. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the rejection based on unjust enrichment was incorrect, citing precedents that the burden of service tax could not be passed on post-amalgamation and that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to a State-owned enterprise. en-us Tue, 04 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Dec 2018 06:35:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372021 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI set aside the rejection of the refund claim by the authorities, ruling in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it was filed within the prescribed period after the amalgamation order. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the rejection based on unjust enrichment was incorrect, citing precedents that the burden of service tax could not be passed on post-amalgamation and that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to a State-owned enterprise. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 04 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372021