TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1016X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ERVICES PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, PUNE-II [ 2020 (1) TMI 1350 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein it has been held by the Tribunal that the time limit to file the refund claim would expire at the end of the quarter and this condition remains unaltered even after the amendment vide Notification No. 14/16 dated 01.03.2016. The last date to file the refund claim for invoices number 7 and 8 issued by the Mohali unit is to be calculated from the last date of the quarter i.e. 31.12.2016 and hence the refund application filed on 15.12.2017 is within the time limit as prescribed by the notification. Appeal allowed. - Service Tax Appeal No. 60292 of 2022 - FINAL ORDER NO. 60089/2023 - Dated:- 31-3-2023 - MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the period of one year to file a refund claim in terms of Notification No. 14/2016 dated 01.03.2016. The appellant filed the reply to the show cause notice and controverted all the allegations in the show cause notice. After due process the Assistant Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 12.02.2019 had rejected the refund claim amounting to Rs. 2, 56,262/- as time barred. 3. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner CGST appeal, Ludhiana, which was rejected by the commissioner Appeal by upholding the Order-in-Original. 4. Heard both the parties and perused the record. 5. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim is required to be filed in each quarter and the time limit of one year to file the refund claim is to be counted from the last day of the quarter. He also submitted that the last date to file a refund claim in invoice no. 7 and 8 issued by Mohali Unit should be calculated from the last date of the quarter i.e. 31.12.2016 and therefore the refund application filed on 15.12.2017 is within the time limit. 6. On the other hand, Ld. AR for the Revenue defended the findings of the Commissioner Appeal and submitted that the refund claim amounting to Rs. 2,56,262/- for the period of the October, 2016 to December, 2016 is time barred. She further submitted that in the present case the payments have been received in convertible foreign exch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quarter and this condition remains unaltered even after the amendment vide Notification No. 14/16 dated 01.03.2016. Further this Tribunal in the case of M/s Penta Software Pvt. Ltd. And M/s. QL2 Software India Pvt. Ltd Vs. C.C.E S.T. Gurgaon (Supra) has held as under:- In the notification on the one hand, it has been stated that one refund claim is to be filed quarterly and on the other hand, it is saying that within one year from the date of receiving of the foreign convertible exchange, when a notification is having ambiguity that the benefit of doubt goes in favour of the assessee as held by this Tribunal in the case of M/s Mangalam Alloys Ltd. Vs. CCE Ahmedabad, reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T. 124 (Tri. Ahmd), wherein this Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
