https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450460 A notification or rule cannot fasten service tax on an importer in a CIF ocean-freight contract where the importer is neither the service provider nor the service recipient, and machinery or reverse charge provisions cannot enlarge the charging section. The text also states that later IGST notifications on transportation of goods by vessel from outside India to the customs station were treated as impermissible separate levies on the same composite supply, and that tax collected without authority of law engages Article 265. Refund cannot be denied merely because payment was voluntary, though it remains subject to the statutory refund scheme and unjust enrichment. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jun 2026 14:24:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450460 A notification or rule cannot fasten service tax on an importer in a CIF ocean-freight contract where the importer is neither the service provider nor the service recipient, and machinery or reverse charge provisions cannot enlarge the charging section. The text also states that later IGST notifications on transportation of goods by vessel from outside India to the customs station were treated as impermissible separate levies on the same composite supply, and that tax collected without authority of law engages Article 265. Refund cannot be denied merely because payment was voluntary, though it remains subject to the statutory refund scheme and unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450460