<?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>2019 (5) TMI 1408 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380680</link>
    <description>Refund under an exemption notification cannot be denied by importing conditions not found in the governing text. The tribunal held that the claimant was not required to prove that service providers had not availed any exemption or tax benefit, and no separate requirement existed that the providers be authorised by the port; refund rejection on both grounds was therefore unsustainable. It also found that a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate filed with the claim was sufficient compliance, since the notification did not prescribe a specific format and self-certification was not required on the facts. The refund orders were set aside and the appeals succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 May 2019 07:02:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1408 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380680</link>
      <description>Refund under an exemption notification cannot be denied by importing conditions not found in the governing text. The tribunal held that the claimant was not required to prove that service providers had not availed any exemption or tax benefit, and no separate requirement existed that the providers be authorised by the port; refund rejection on both grounds was therefore unsustainable. It also found that a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate filed with the claim was sufficient compliance, since the notification did not prescribe a specific format and self-certification was not required on the facts. The refund orders were set aside and the appeals succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>