https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468711 Where CENVAT credit on input services used for export of services had already been examined and accepted for the same period, a later attempt to deny the credit and related refund on the basis of the ST-3 returns was not sustainable. The record showed prior correlation and acceptance of the credit position, so the refund remained admissible and the denial of credit failed. On limitation, reopening the same period without evidence of fraud, suppression of facts, negligence, or other grounds for the extended period could not sustain the demand. The impugned orders were set aside, and relief followed on both refund entitlement and limitation. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2026 20:58:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468711 Where CENVAT credit on input services used for export of services had already been examined and accepted for the same period, a later attempt to deny the credit and related refund on the basis of the ST-3 returns was not sustainable. The record showed prior correlation and acceptance of the credit position, so the refund remained admissible and the denial of credit failed. On limitation, reopening the same period without evidence of fraud, suppression of facts, negligence, or other grounds for the extended period could not sustain the demand. The impugned orders were set aside, and relief followed on both refund entitlement and limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468711