https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418823 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the refund claim for service tax under the reverse charge mechanism was valid. It found that the appellant had paid the tax promptly, in compliance with the law, and there was no evidence of passing on the burden to customers. The Tribunal emphasized that the amended law allowed the refund without unjust enrichment implications, and the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting the claim without substantial evidence. Compliance with statutory provisions and lack of malafide intent were key factors in the Tribunal's decision to sanction the refund. en-us Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 May 2022 16:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418823 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the refund claim for service tax under the reverse charge mechanism was valid. It found that the appellant had paid the tax promptly, in compliance with the law, and there was no evidence of passing on the burden to customers. The Tribunal emphasized that the amended law allowed the refund without unjust enrichment implications, and the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting the claim without substantial evidence. Compliance with statutory provisions and lack of malafide intent were key factors in the Tribunal's decision to sanction the refund. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418823