https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295250 An amended six-month limitation period for refund claims under the refund notification was applied to pending claims where the governing notification and circular so provided, and claims filed within six months from the end of the relevant quarter were therefore in time. Minor invoice discrepancies did not justify rejection of the entire refund claim for service tax paid on input services used for exports, because the defects were confined to a few invoices and the substantive refund conditions were otherwise satisfied. The broader principle is that refund relief should not be denied on purely technical documentary defects when eligibility is established. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 May 2021 08:40:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295250 An amended six-month limitation period for refund claims under the refund notification was applied to pending claims where the governing notification and circular so provided, and claims filed within six months from the end of the relevant quarter were therefore in time. Minor invoice discrepancies did not justify rejection of the entire refund claim for service tax paid on input services used for exports, because the defects were confined to a few invoices and the substantive refund conditions were otherwise satisfied. The broader principle is that refund relief should not be denied on purely technical documentary defects when eligibility is established. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295250