<?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>2022 (6) TMI 613 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423772</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the rejection of refund claims for service tax paid on Commission Agent&#039;s service. It held that the claims were filed within the prescribed time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Emphasizing that the right to claim refund arises upon payment of service tax, the Tribunal granted relief to the appellants, clarifying the interpretation of the time bar provision and ensuring their claims were not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2022 09:16:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=682044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 613 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423772</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the rejection of refund claims for service tax paid on Commission Agent&#039;s service. It held that the claims were filed within the prescribed time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Emphasizing that the right to claim refund arises upon payment of service tax, the Tribunal granted relief to the appellants, clarifying the interpretation of the time bar provision and ensuring their claims were not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>