<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (10) TMI 620 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779824</link>
    <description>CESTAT BANGALORE - AT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, directing refund of service tax paid in FY 2015-16 consequent to termination of the contract w.e.f. 31.08.2017. The Tribunal held the refund application filed on 24.04.2018 under Section 142(5) of the CGST Act was maintainable, following the consistent view of the Tribunal in a similar case where advance-invoiced service tax paid and later returned upon cancellation entitled the taxpayer to refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:39:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858240" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 620 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779824</link>
      <description>CESTAT BANGALORE - AT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, directing refund of service tax paid in FY 2015-16 consequent to termination of the contract w.e.f. 31.08.2017. The Tribunal held the refund application filed on 24.04.2018 under Section 142(5) of the CGST Act was maintainable, following the consistent view of the Tribunal in a similar case where advance-invoiced service tax paid and later returned upon cancellation entitled the taxpayer to refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>