Statutory limitation governs service tax refunds, and payment under mistake does not bypass the refund deadline.

Refund of service tax under the statutory refund mechanism remained subject to the prescribed limitation period, and a claim filed beyond that period was treated as time-barred. A plea that the payment had been made under mistake did not override or displace the statutory time limit for refund claims. Reliance on a High Court writ decision was found inapposite because the Tribunal had to apply the refund statute as written and did not exercise the broader constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The refund claim was rejected on limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the claim for refund of service tax was barred by limitation under the statutory refund provision, and whether payment alleged to have been made under mistake could escape that limitation.

Analysis: The refund claim was filed beyond the prescribed period under the statutory refund mechanism. The plea that the amount had been paid under mistake did not displace the limitation applicable to refund claims under the statute. The reliance on a High Court writ decision was held inapposite because the Tribunal was bound by the statutory limitation scheme and did not exercise the wide writ jurisdiction available under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The refund claim was held to be time-barred and the appeal was rejected.

---