Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II Versus M/s Sitel India Ltd.

2016 (4) TMI 112 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Application of time-limit of Section 11B of Service Tax Act, 1994 - Rejection of refund claim for Service tax availed on input services which were procured for rendering output services which were exported without payment of Service tax - Held that:- the first appellate authority has correctly applied the law by relying the decisions of higher judicial forum. Therefore, the impugned order is correct, legal and does not suffer from any infirmity as the refund claim is not hit by time bar and appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-IV), Mumbai Zone-I. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The respondent filed refund claim with the authorities for the Service Tax availed on input services which were procured for rendering output services which were exported without payment of Service Tax. The said two refund claims were rejected on the ground that they were filed beyond the period of one year as provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which requires filing of refund claims within one year from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on the ground of limitation. I find that refund for the period Jan to March, 2007 was filed on 28.03.2008 and refund for the period April to June, 2007 was filed on 26.06.2008, which were filed within prescribed period of one year from the relevant date i.e. end of the respective quarters. The said refund claims would become time barred if the same were filed after 31.03.2008 and 30.06.2008 respectively. In this connection I rely on CBEC Circular No. 112/6/2009-S.T. dated 12.03.2009 issued under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-Jun 2008 could be filed till 31st Dec. 2008. As per Notification No. 05/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.03.2006, the refund is required to be filed on quarterly basis and EOU units are allowed to file the same on monthly basis i.e. EOU units are having option to file refund on monthly or quarterly basis. I find that since the appellant has filed refund claim for a quarter, the relevant date for filing refund is end of the quarter and not in accordance with that defined under sub-clause (e) of the Explan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edit debited towards duty payable, it will amount to payment of duty- Section 11B ibid refers to refund of duty paid - Refund claim not of duty paid but of CENVAT credit already taken Issue decided by Tribunal in case of Swagat Synthetics Ltd. [2007 (220) ELT 949 (Tribunal)] as upheld by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court [2008 (232) ELT 413 (Guj.)] holding such accumulated credit as akin to credit in PLA - Claims not hit by time bar further as Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) not specify any tim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version