https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754238 CESTAT Bangalore rejected the appellant's service tax refund claims. The tribunal held that output services were not exported in accordance with Export of Services Rules, 2005 as services were provided from subsidiary units in Australia, USA and China rather than from India, with payments made to foreign banks. The Order-in-Original did not traverse beyond the show-cause notice scope despite late filing of supporting documents for 45,000 export invoices. Since services were not considered exports, the question of correlation between input and output services became immaterial. Appeals were rejected and the impugned order was upheld. en-us Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754238 CESTAT Bangalore rejected the appellant's service tax refund claims. The tribunal held that output services were not exported in accordance with Export of Services Rules, 2005 as services were provided from subsidiary units in Australia, USA and China rather than from India, with payments made to foreign banks. The Order-in-Original did not traverse beyond the show-cause notice scope despite late filing of supporting documents for 45,000 export invoices. Since services were not considered exports, the question of correlation between input and output services became immaterial. Appeals were rejected and the impugned order was upheld. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754238