https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437801 Refund of excess service tax on works contract services was sustained where contemporaneous records, including the work order, tax statements, VAT records and the certificate of the contracting entity, matched on dates, amounts and nature of work, and the ST-3 return tallied with the refund claim; the denial for want of proof was therefore unsustainable. The bar of unjust enrichment did not apply because the service tax under reverse charge was deducted in the bills, showing that the incidence of tax was borne by the claimant and not passed on to another person. The rejection of refund was set aside and consequential relief was granted. en-us Fri, 12 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 May 2023 08:32:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437801 Refund of excess service tax on works contract services was sustained where contemporaneous records, including the work order, tax statements, VAT records and the certificate of the contracting entity, matched on dates, amounts and nature of work, and the ST-3 return tallied with the refund claim; the denial for want of proof was therefore unsustainable. The bar of unjust enrichment did not apply because the service tax under reverse charge was deducted in the bills, showing that the incidence of tax was borne by the claimant and not passed on to another person. The rejection of refund was set aside and consequential relief was granted. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 12 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437801