Refund limitation under Section 11B turns on the relevant date, not the original payment date, securing refund relief.

Refund limitation under Section 11B had to be computed with reference to the statutorily prescribed "relevant date", not merely the date of original tax payment. Because the claim was filed after an audit objection and the service tax burden had been reversed by debit note, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in treating the refund as time-barred. The earlier precedent relied on by the Revenue was found inapplicable after the amendment substituting "relevant date" for "date of payment". The limitation objection failed, and the assessee was held entitled to refund of the full amount with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation under Section 11B and whether the assessee was entitled to refund of the amount paid as service tax on the job-work activity.

Analysis: The refund claim was filed after the audit objection had arisen and the tax burden had been reversed through a debit note. The governing provision required the claim to be tested with reference to the "relevant date", not merely the original date of payment. On the facts, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) had wrongly treated the claim as time-barred. The earlier precedent relied upon by the Revenue was held inapplicable in view of the statutory amendment substituting "relevant date" for "date of payment".

Conclusion: The limitation objection failed and the assessee was held entitled to refund of the full amount claimed.

Final Conclusion: The refund order was restored and consequential relief was granted in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: For refund claims governed by Section 11B, limitation must be computed with reference to the statutorily prescribed relevant date, and a refund claim cannot be rejected as time-barred on an incorrect assumption that the date of original payment is ative.

---