Retrospective limitation on refund claims rejected where accrued refund rights could not be cut off without clear legislative intent.

The amendment to section 51(7) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 reducing the refund-claim limitation from three years to eighteen months was treated as prospective because a refund right, once accrued, is a vested right and not a mere procedural matter. In the absence of express retrospective wording or necessary implication, the shorter limitation could not defeat a refund application that was otherwise within the original three-year period. The refund claim was therefore not time barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amendment to section 51(7) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 reducing the limitation for refund applications from three years to eighteen months operated retrospectively so as to bar a refund application filed within three years but after the amendment.

Analysis: The right to claim refund, once accrued, was treated as an existing or vested right and not a mere matter of procedure. A curtailment of limitation affecting such a right could operate only if the amending provision expressly so provided or such intention was necessarily implied. The amendment replacing "three years" with "eighteen months" contained no express retrospective language or necessary intendment. Since the refund claim for the relevant year was sought to be filed before expiry of the original three-year period, the amended limitation could not defeat it.

Conclusion: The amendment was held to be prospective and not retrospective, and the refund application could not be rejected as time barred.

---