TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und of service tax on 29.12.2017 which is beyond 6 months from 31.03.2017. It is filed within one year from the date of assent of the Finance Bill, 2017. Further, in the present case, the appellant is not at all responsible for the delay. The Section 104 of the Finance Act, 1994 does not provide as to who has to file the refund claim. When SIPCOT has collected service tax from the appellant, the refund claim can be filed by SIPCOT or the appellant. However, when the appellant has to make an application for refund, they have to get the necessary documents from SIPCOT. Only after obtaining necessary documents, the refund claim can be filed. SIPCOT has intimated the appellant vide letter dated 09.11.2017. This letter issued by SIPCOT dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... President of India. As per the above time limit prescribed, the Finance Bill, 2017 was passed on 01.04.2017 and the refund claim has to be filed on or before 30.09.2017. The appellant had filed the refund claim only on 29.12.2017 which is beyond 6 months as prescribed under Section 104 (3) of the Act. Show cause notice was issued proposing to reject the refund claim on the ground of limitation. After due process of law, the original authority rejected the refund claim against which the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The order passed by the adjudicating authority rejecting the refund claim was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Counsel Shri M. Manimaran a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 09.02.2021 and the decision in Roop Automotives Ltd. Vs CGST CE Chennai - 2019 (37) ELT 1676 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. Heard both sides. 5. The appellant had claimed refund of service tax paid on development charges as under Section 104 of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended. The said section reads as under :- SECTION 104. Special provision for exemption in certain cases relating to long term lease of industrial plots. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 66, as it stood prior to the 1st day of July, 2012, or in section 66B, no service tax, leviable on one time upfront amount (premium, salami, cost, price, development charge or by whatever name called) in respect of taxable service provided or agreed to be provided b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, when the appellant has to make an application for refund, they have to get the necessary documents from SIPCOT. The documents in the nature of proof of payment of service tax and also the letter of SIPCOT stating that SIPCOT has not applied for refund have to be submitted for claiming the refund. Only after obtaining necessary documents, the refund claim can be filed. SIPCOT has intimated the appellant vide letter dated 09.11.2017. This letter issued by SIPCOT dated 09.11.2017 has been received by the appellant only on 26.11.2017. The refund claim has been filed in the next month itself. Thus, it can be seen that there is no delay on the side of the appellant. In the decision cited by the Ld. Counsel for appellant, on the very same set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
