Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1415 - AT - Service TaxRefund of unutilized CENVAT credit - rejection on the ground of time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - rejection on the ground that the application for refund of CENVAT credit was submitted after expiry of one year from the relevant date under Section 11B of CEA - Held that: - the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly relied upon the decision of the GTN Engineering (I) Ltd. [2011 (8) TMI 960 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that Section 11B will be applicable for the purpose of claiming refund under Rule 5 of the CCR. This issue has been considered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indo-Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. Vs. UOI [2002 (2) TMI 136 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and the Hon'ble High Court after considering the provisions of Section 11B as well as the CCR has come to the conclusion that Section 11B of the Act is applicable for the purpose of seeking of refund of CENVAT credit. There is a specific condition that the refund claims are required to be filed within the period specified under Section 11B - completely ignoring the provisions of Section 11B may not be appropriate. Section 11B is applicable for the purpose of computation of one year period for filing the refund claim and for export of service, the "relevant date" for the purpose of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claim under Rule 5 of CCR will be the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs received. Refund is barred by limitation under Section 11B of the Act - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|