Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (4) TMI 667

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plicable to refund claims for service tax paid under a mistake of law. Unjust enrichment - Held that: - the respondent had produced a Chartered Accountant's certificate indicating clearly that the amount of refund claim filed by them are reflected in the balance sheet as amounts receivable from the Central Excise department and they have not passed on the amount to their customers - In the absence of any contrary evidence to indicate that respondent has recovered the amount from their customers, the first appellate authority has come to a correct conclusion in holding that there is no unjust enrichment in this case. Refund allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/86924/2017 - A/85659/2018 - Dated:- 12-3-2018 - Sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g that the refund claim is barred by limitation and the doctrine of unjust enrichment is attracted. On appeal, the first appellate authority set aside the order-in-original and allowed the appeal. 4. Learned Authorised Representative after taking through the facts of the case, reads order-in-original and order-in-appeal and grounds of appeal. He submits that the provisions of Section 11B are very clear inasmuch as the amount which has been sought as refund as claimed, has to be filed within one year of the relevant date. It is his submission in the case in hand that the respondent discharged service tax liability on his own volition and tax was due. The refund application filed on 18/04/2016 for the tax discharged during October 2010 to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ik [2017-TIOL-2170-HCMUM-ST]; In House Productions Limited v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai [2017-TIOL-1242-HC-MUM-CX] and unreported judgment in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. SGR infratech Limited in Central Excise Appeal No. 26 of 2014 decided on 28/10/2015. 7. On careful consideration of the submission I find that the following issues needs to be decided in the present appeal: (i) Whether the refund claim filed by the respondent is time-barred as per the provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 19044 as made applicable to the Finance Act, 1994; and (ii) Whether the claim is hit by principles of unjust enrichment. 8. It is undisputed that for the period October 2010 to June 2011 respo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the amount of refund claim filed by them are reflected in the balance sheet as amounts receivable from the Central Excise department and they have not passed on the amount to their customers. Revenue authorities in the appeal memorandum did not effectively counter these findings of fact by the first appellate authority. In the absence of any contrary evidence to indicate that respondent has recovered the amount from their customers, I find that the first appellate authority has come to a correct conclusion in holding that there is no unjust enrichment in this case. 10. In view of the foregoing I find that the impugned order is correct, legal and does not suffer from any infirmity and the appeal stands rejected. (Pronounced in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates