2018 (10) TMI 645

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Srivastava (CA) for Appellant Shri Mohd Altaf (Asstt. Commr.) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the authorities below and related to the same set of facts and circumstance. After hearing both the sides, we note that appellant is running authorized service station and d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d that they have already paid VAT on the said service, as per the order of the VAT Authorities. The said refund claim stand denied by the authorities below on the ground of limitation as also on unjust enrichment. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the subsequent to the confirmation of the VAT, they have deposited the same with the VAT Authorities, though he fairly agree .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the authorities working under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act and there is no rule or authority to extend the said period, even if the denial of refund results in undue orders against the assessee. 5. We fully agree with the above contentions of the learned AR. There is no dispute that the refund claims stand filed after the normal period of limitation provided under Section 11 B .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X