Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Time-limit of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 doesn’t apply to refund of wrongly paid Service tax

Bimal jain
CESTAT Rules Section 11B Time-Limit Inapplicable for Refunds of Wrongly Paid Service Tax on Residential Units The Central Excise Act's Section 11B time-limit does not apply to refunds of wrongly paid Service tax, as determined by the CESTAT, Mumbai. In a case where an individual purchased a residential unit and was wrongly charged Service tax by the builder, the refund claim was initially sanctioned but later contested by the Revenue on the grounds of being time-barred. The CESTAT ruled that since no Service tax was due on the residential unit, the amount paid was not considered Service tax, thus exempting it from the Section 11B time-limit, and ruled in favor of the individual. (AI Summary)

Dear Professional Colleague,

Time-limit of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 doesn’t apply to refund of wrongly paid Service tax

We are sharing with you an important judgment of CESTAT, Mumbai, the case of Jyotsana D. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur [2014 (10) TMI 642 - CESTAT MUMBAI ] on following issue:

Issue:

Whether the Time-limit prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would apply to refund of wrongly paid Service tax?

Facts and background:

In the instant case, Jyotsana D. Patel (“the Appellant”) purchased a residential unit from a builder, on which the builder had collected Service tax and deposited the same with the Department. As there is no levy of Service tax on residential unit as held by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of K.V.R. Constructions Vs. CCE [2009 (8) TMI 150 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ], the Appellant filed a refund claim of the amount paid by the builder as Service tax to the Department. The refund claim filed by the Appellant was sanctioned by the Adjudicating Authority.

Thereafter, on appeal being filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the refund claim is barred by limitation. Being aggrieved, the Appellant filed an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai.

Held:

The Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai held that when the Appellant was not required to pay any Service tax for acquisition of residential unit, amount deposited would not be considered as an amount of Service tax and therefore, time limit prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 will not be applicable. Accordingly, Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside and the matter was decided in favour of the Appellant.

Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.

Thanks and Best Regards,

Bimal Jain

FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)

Delhi:

Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket - 1,

Mayur Vihar, Phase - I,

Delhi – 110091, India

Desktel: +91-11-22757595/ 42427056

Mobile: +91 9810604563

Chandigarh:

H.No. 908, Sector 12-A,

Panchkula, Haryana – 134115

Kolkata:

Ist Floor, 10 R G Kar Road

Shyambazar, Kolkata – 700 004

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.a2ztaxcorp.com

Disclaimer: The contents of this document are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the authors nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this document nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

Readers are advised to consult the professional for understanding applicability of this newsletter in the respective scenarios. While due care has been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions herein is not ruled out. No part of this document should be distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without our written permission.

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles