SEZ refund limitation relief applied for condonation sought in the refund claim itself, with rejection set aside.

SEZ refund claims under Notification No. 9/2009-ST were treated liberally where the scheme was new and procedural uncertainty existed. The Tribunal held that a separate application for extension of time was not required when condonation was sought in the refund application itself, and the delay could be considered on that basis. As the rejection rested solely on limitation, it could not be sustained. The limitation-based rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the refund claim on merits, with the issue resolved in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether a separate application was required for extension of time to file the SEZ refund claim, and whether the delay in filing the refund application could be condoned on the basis of the request made in the refund application itself.

Analysis: The refund scheme under Notification No. 9/2009-ST was intended to grant exemption by way of refund for taxable services used for authorized operations in an SEZ. The Tribunal accepted that the scheme was new, that confusion existed regarding the procedural requirements, and that the appellant had sought condonation in the refund application itself. Relying on the earlier Tribunal view that no separate application for extension was necessary, the Tribunal adopted a liberal approach to the limitation issue and found that the rejection solely on the ground of limitation could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The limitation-based rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the refund claim on merits. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---