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 (5) TMI 319

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e should be reckoned from the end of the quarter. The issue has been considered in the case of CCE & CST, Bengaluru Service Tax-I Versus M/s. Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (2) TMI 946 - CESTAT BANGALORE], where it was held that In respect of export of services, the relevant date for purposes of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claims under Rule 5 of the CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRC is received, in cases where the refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/85890/2015 - A/86066/2018 - Dated:- 18-4-2018 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member (Technical) None for Appellant Shri M. Suresh (A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . If it is so, the refund claim of the appellant were filed well within the stipulated time period of l year. In any case the period of 1 year cannot be reckoned from the date of FIRC. However, the same should be reckoned from the end of the quarter. This issue has been considered by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bengaluru Service Tax-I Vs. Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. 2018-TIOL-516-CESTAT-BANG-LB, wherein the Hon ble Larger Bench has observed as under: 9. Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provides for refund of unutilized CENVAT credit, even after adjustment of the same for payment of duty of excise or service tax. The conditions, safeguards and limitations for c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Court in the case of GTN Engineering (supra) wherein Hon'ble High Court has disagreed with the view expressed by Hon'ble Karnataka High court in the case of mPortal (supra) that Section 11B will have no application with respect to refund under Rule 5 of CCR. 11. The definition of relevant date in Section 11B does not specifically cover the case of export of services. Hence, it is necessary to interpret the provisions constructively so as to give it meaning such that the objective of the provisions; i.e. to grant refund of unutilized CENVAT credit, is facilitated. By reference to the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as well as the successor provisions i.e. the Export of Service Rules, 2005, we note that export of services is completed .....

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