TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 668X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Parijat Construction [2017 (10) TMI 659 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] will apply in full force, where it was held the Division Bench of this Court in Hindustan Cocoa [1994 (6) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY] has held that the limitation prescribed under Section 11 B of the said Act to be not applicable to refund claims for service tax paid u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question of limitation and the first appellate authority has overturned the said order-in-original by referring and relying upon various decisions of the higher judicial forum. 4. Learned Authorised Representative submits that the refund claim has arisen out of the tax paid by the appellant on his own volition under the works contract service. The said works contract service, as per the Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oductions Ltd v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai 2017-TIOL-1242-HC-MUM-CX has held that when service tax is paid under mistake of law, the question of limitation or the time-bar as provided under Section 11B does not arise. In the entire proceedings, before the lower authorities as well as before the Tribunal, I find that the Revenue is not disputing the fact that the respondent herein is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax by making an application under Section 11B of CEA, which was rejected as time barred and also on the ground of unjust enrichment as per Section I ID of the CEA. In this regard, primarily, I find that the Respondent has not disputed the eligibility of the benefit of Notification No. 12/2012-ST dated 17.3.2012 and 25/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 to the Appellant. In other words, it can be sur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
