Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 168 - AT - Service TaxSEZ Unit - Refund claim - time limitation - various services received during the period April 2009 to March 2013 and March 2011 to July 2012, appellant had filed these returns on 07.10.2013 and 21.10.2013 - it was alleged that appellant had filed the returns belatedly i.e. beyond the period of one year - N/N. 9/2009-ST and N/N. 17/2011-ST, dated 1.3.2011. Held that:- It is not in dispute that appellant is an SEZ unit and he is not liable to pay any tax or duty for the services on the inputs received by him as per SEZ Act. In order to monitor as a facilitative mechanism, notification No. 17/2011-ST provided for discharge of service tax liability by the service providers first and subsequently the service recipient in SEZ to claim the said refund after making the payment to the service provider. The said notification, as rightly pointed out by Ld. Counsel, does have a clause for extending the time or condoning the delay in filing the refund claims by the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner or Dy. Commissioner, as the case may be. In the case in hand, it is noticed that at the time of personal hearing before the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner, the Counsel for appellant had specifically requested the Asst. Commissioner, to condone the delay made in filing of the refund claims - The adjudicating authority, in the case in hand, despite recording the same and within his authority to condone the delay, did not do so. On merits, it is noticed that appellant is eligible for refund. The adjudicating authority should have condoned the delay and processed the claim in a broader perspective. The delay is condoned and the refund claims being on merits admissible, are allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|