<?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>Wrong assessee code and unjust enrichment cannot defeat refund once the service tax levy fails on mutuality grounds.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100978</link>
    <description>Refund of service tax paid under a wrong assessee code was treated as a matter of internal departmental adjustment, not a ground to deny substantive refund once the levy had failed. Amounts deposited during investigation were treated as pre-deposit rather than tax recovered from customers, so the bar of unjust enrichment did not apply mechanically. Where collections from members were covered by mutuality and service tax was not leviable, there was no basis to assume passing on of tax incidence. The retained investigation deposit was therefore refundable, and the unpaid balance was directed to be returned with applicable interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:39:17 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:39:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Wrong assessee code and unjust enrichment cannot defeat refund once the service tax levy fails on mutuality grounds.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100978</link>
      <description>Refund of service tax paid under a wrong assessee code was treated as a matter of internal departmental adjustment, not a ground to deny substantive refund once the levy had failed. Amounts deposited during investigation were treated as pre-deposit rather than tax recovered from customers, so the bar of unjust enrichment did not apply mechanically. Where collections from members were covered by mutuality and service tax was not leviable, there was no basis to assume passing on of tax incidence. The retained investigation deposit was therefore refundable, and the unpaid balance was directed to be returned with applicable interest.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:39:17 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100978</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>