Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2016 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (6) TMI 158 - AT - Service TaxEligibility of refund claim - payment of service under protest - rejection of refund for the period 01/4/2006 to 23/4/2007 as barred by limitation and for the period post 24/4/2007, on account of non-submission of documentary evidence indicating that refund claim was related to payment of service tax for Construction of Residential Services - Service tax paid under protest - Held that:- the respondent’s claim of refund of service tax cannot be held to have been made by the said letter dated 24/4/2007 and the same is clearly relatable to future service tax which they started paying under protest in terms of the said letter. There is no mention of the period for which the refund of service tax is being sought. Merely on requesting the Superintendent to refund the service tax, without even quantifying the same and without even referring to the period during which the same was deposited, especially when they continued to pay in future awaiting the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court cannot be considered to be a refund application for the payments already made by them in the past. As such, we fully agree with the Revenue that the said letter cannot be considered to be a refund application. It is well settled law that the Authorities working under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act and no general limitation period can be adopted for grant of refund even in those cases where it was not required to be paid. The provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 lays down the limitation period of one year from th4e relevant date for claim of refund to be made by an Assessee unless the same has been paid under protest. It is well settled law that the Authorities working under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act and no general limitation period can be adopted for grant of refund even in those cases where it was not required to be paid. The provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 lays down the limitation period of one year from th4e relevant date for claim of refund to be made by an Assessee unless the same has been paid under protest. Accordingly, the refund of ₹ 72,21,075/- is barred by limitation as held by the Original Adjudicating Authority. In respect of the remaining amount of ₹ 32,67,569/-, which falls within the limitation period, we note that the fact the service tax was deposited by the Assessee in relation to the services of Residential Complex Construction is required to be examined. The factual position is required to be ascertained irrespective of the fact as to whether the Assessee was registered under the said services or not. Further, the principle of unjust enrichment is also required to be examined. Such factual verifications can be done only at the level of Original Adjudicating Authority, for which purpose we remand the matter to him. - Revenue’s appeal is partially allowed and partially remanded
|