https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427577 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that rejected the refund claim. It held that the refusal to grant Cenvat credit due to lack of registration and the rejection based on the appellant and group companies being establishments of a distinct person were unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that procedural irregularities should not deny substantive benefits like refunds, concluding that the appellant's services qualified as exports and met all necessary conditions under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. en-us Fri, 09 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Sep 2022 13:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427577 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that rejected the refund claim. It held that the refusal to grant Cenvat credit due to lack of registration and the rejection based on the appellant and group companies being establishments of a distinct person were unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that procedural irregularities should not deny substantive benefits like refunds, concluding that the appellant's services qualified as exports and met all necessary conditions under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 09 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427577