Abhishek Raja "Ram"

@abhishekrajaram

8 months ago

•View on X

š—–š—˜š—¦š—§š—”š—§ š—”š—µš—ŗš—²š—±š—®š—Æš—®š—± š—„š˜‚š—¹š—¶š—»š—“ š—¼š—» š—¦š—²š—æš˜ƒš—¶š—°š—² š—§š—®š˜… š—³š—¼š—æ š—–š—µš—®š—¹š—¹š—²š—»š—“š—² š—¶š—» š—„š—²š—³š˜‚š—»š—± š—³š—¼š—æ š—–š—›š—” š—¦š—²š—æš˜ƒš—¶š—°š—²š˜€ šŸ“¢ š—§š—µš—² š—§š—æš—¶š—Æš˜‚š—»š—®š—¹ š—µš—²š—¹š—±: "Refund for services provided by CHA, including non-CHA services, is admissible under Notification No. 17/09-ST, as long as the service is provided by a CHA."

šŸ” š—™š—®š—°š˜š˜€: š—–š—¼š—ŗš—½š—®š—»š˜†: Laviosa Trimex Industries Pvt Ltd. š—œš˜€š˜€š˜‚š—²: Whether the appellant is entitled to claim refund for services provided by CHA. š—”š—°š˜š—¶š˜ƒš—¶š˜š˜†: The appellant received services other than CHA services but provided by CHA. The refund was denied by lower authorities.

āš–ļø š—š˜‚š—±š—“š—²š—ŗš—²š—»š˜: The Tribunal ruled that Notification No. 17/09-ST applies to services provided by CHA, regardless of whether the service is CHA-specific. The appeal was allowed, granting the refund.

šŸ“œ š—–š—®š˜€š—² š—œš—»š—³š—¼š—æš—ŗš—®š˜š—¶š—¼š—»: š—§š—¶š˜š—¹š—²: Laviosa Trimex Industries Pvt Ltd. vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Rajkot – Service Tax š—¢š—æš—±š—²š—æ š——š—®š˜š—²: 25 January 2023 šŸ“œ This ruling confirms that CHA service refunds are applicable for all services provided by a CHA.

More from @abhishekrajaramReply on X

Page created with TweetHunter

Write your own