https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30038 The appeal against the rejection of the refund claim on Business Auxiliary Services was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi. The Tribunal found that the appellant complied with the provisions of Rule 3(1)(b) of the Export of Services Rule, 2005, as they were supposed to receive payment in convertible foreign exchange, which was not released due to deductions by Indian Railways. The denial of the benefit of Rule 4 was deemed unjustified, and the decision was based on the interpretation of legislative intent and fulfillment of conditions under the Rules. en-us Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30038 The appeal against the rejection of the refund claim on Business Auxiliary Services was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi. The Tribunal found that the appellant complied with the provisions of Rule 3(1)(b) of the Export of Services Rule, 2005, as they were supposed to receive payment in convertible foreign exchange, which was not released due to deductions by Indian Railways. The denial of the benefit of Rule 4 was deemed unjustified, and the decision was based on the interpretation of legislative intent and fulfillment of conditions under the Rules. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30038