<?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>2026 (10) TMI 1490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=801547</link>
    <description>Service tax paid under a mistake of law was treated as outside the limitation period applicable to refund claims under Section 11B where entitlement on merits had been accepted; refund for the earlier period was therefore available. From 1 October 2014, facilitation of goods supply fell within intermediary services, for which the place of provision was the service provider&#039;s location under the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. Facilitation services supplied to overseas clients consequently did not qualify for refund for the subsequent period. Omission to specifically cite the amended definition in the show-cause notice did not invalidate proceedings where the allegations were clear.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:37:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=931350" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 1490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=801547</link>
      <description>Service tax paid under a mistake of law was treated as outside the limitation period applicable to refund claims under Section 11B where entitlement on merits had been accepted; refund for the earlier period was therefore available. From 1 October 2014, facilitation of goods supply fell within intermediary services, for which the place of provision was the service provider&#039;s location under the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. Facilitation services supplied to overseas clients consequently did not qualify for refund for the subsequent period. Omission to specifically cite the amended definition in the show-cause notice did not invalidate proceedings where the allegations were clear.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=801547</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>