https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394477 The appellant sought a refund of service tax paid on construction services provided to a government institution, citing exemption under the Finance Act. The lower authorities rejected the claim based on unjust enrichment, as the tax was recovered from the service recipient. The appellant argued the tax amount was later returned to the recipient, supported by a certificate. The Member found the tax incidence was not passed on and ordered further examination by the Adjudicating Authority. The Cenvat credit was deemed inadmissible due to the exemption claimed, to be deducted from the refund amount. The appeal was allowed for a fresh order considering all aspects. en-us Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:03:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394477 The appellant sought a refund of service tax paid on construction services provided to a government institution, citing exemption under the Finance Act. The lower authorities rejected the claim based on unjust enrichment, as the tax was recovered from the service recipient. The appellant argued the tax amount was later returned to the recipient, supported by a certificate. The Member found the tax incidence was not passed on and ordered further examination by the Adjudicating Authority. The Cenvat credit was deemed inadmissible due to the exemption claimed, to be deducted from the refund amount. The appeal was allowed for a fresh order considering all aspects. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394477