Overall, I think the "no-let rule" is more of an advantage for the receiver because points when the ball is slowed down are not played again. It can be the opposite, yes, but overall I think it's more of an advantage for the receiver.
I agree with you. There was an instance of this in the Gulbis-PHM match here, which was very close and basically came down to a let-serve point at the end of the third set tiebreak. It was maybe 2-2 or 3-3, and PHM's first serve hit the net and dropped in, allowing Gulbis to get a way easier return than he would have done. Crowd was confused when Gulbis scrambled up to the ball like a madman to slam the return in the corner (it's actually surprising that Gulbis himself remembered to play the let
Gulbis had been serving unreturnable bombs all match long and was now in good position to take the tiebreak and win thanks to this new no-let rule. But of course, this being Gulbis, he found a way to mug it up even then and squandered his two service points.