https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374757 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that rejected refund claims for services provided to an overseas client under a professional service agreement. The Tribunal held that the services qualified as exports under Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012, despite data processing in India. The rejection of refund claims for the disputed period, while approving claims for earlier and subsequent periods without a change in circumstances, was deemed unjustified. The appellant's appeal was allowed with any consequential relief as per law. en-us Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jun 2019 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374757 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that rejected refund claims for services provided to an overseas client under a professional service agreement. The Tribunal held that the services qualified as exports under Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012, despite data processing in India. The rejection of refund claims for the disputed period, while approving claims for earlier and subsequent periods without a change in circumstances, was deemed unjustified. The appellant's appeal was allowed with any consequential relief as per law. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374757