<?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 (12) TMI 97 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782557</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax credit for rent a cab services used by an SEZ unit for authorised operations could not be denied merely because Approval Committee approval was absent when the services were received. Notification No. 12/2013 was read as not requiring prior approval at the receipt stage, and the relevant date was the filing of the refund claim after the service had been included in the specified services list. Section 51 of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 gave the SEZ regime overriding effect over inconsistent service tax requirements, and the later instruction was treated as clarificatory and retrospective. Refund with consequential relief was therefore allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2025 11:45:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=868567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 97 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782557</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax credit for rent a cab services used by an SEZ unit for authorised operations could not be denied merely because Approval Committee approval was absent when the services were received. Notification No. 12/2013 was read as not requiring prior approval at the receipt stage, and the relevant date was the filing of the refund claim after the service had been included in the specified services list. Section 51 of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 gave the SEZ regime overriding effect over inconsistent service tax requirements, and the later instruction was treated as clarificatory and retrospective. Refund with consequential relief was therefore allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782557</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>