<?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>2021 (12) TMI 622 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415856</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim as time-barred, following the High Court ruling that a refund claim cannot be barred by limitation if service tax is paid by mistake. The Tribunal emphasized that allowing the Revenue to retain excess tax paid would be unconstitutional. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with consequential benefits in accordance with the law, based on the binding precedent established by the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 16:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=664099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 622 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415856</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim as time-barred, following the High Court ruling that a refund claim cannot be barred by limitation if service tax is paid by mistake. The Tribunal emphasized that allowing the Revenue to retain excess tax paid would be unconstitutional. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with consequential benefits in accordance with the law, based on the binding precedent established by the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>