<?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>Appellant Wins Service Tax Refund for Export Services Under RCM; Services Not Covered by Section 65(9.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=62611</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax - Business Auxiliary services - export of service or not - non-production of Foreign inward remittance certificate - the appellant’s service would qualify as export service, ARVs are heavy vehicles and hence, are not covered under Section 65(9) ibid. and hence the ST paid under RCM was by mistake as claimed by the appellant, which qualifies for refund. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:21:48 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:21:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appellant Wins Service Tax Refund for Export Services Under RCM; Services Not Covered by Section 65(9.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=62611</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax - Business Auxiliary services - export of service or not - non-production of Foreign inward remittance certificate - the appellant’s service would qualify as export service, ARVs are heavy vehicles and hence, are not covered under Section 65(9) ibid. and hence the ST paid under RCM was by mistake as claimed by the appellant, which qualifies for refund. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:21:48 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=62611</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>