Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the limitation for claiming rebate of service tax under Notification No. 41/2012-ST could be computed from the date of receipt of invoices instead of the date of Let Export Order.
Analysis: The refund claim arose under Section 94A of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Notification No. 41/2012-ST, which prescribed a claim period of one year from the date of export, defined for that purpose by reference to the Let Export Order. The notification was treated as subordinate legislation laying down a mandatory time limit, and the Tribunal held that neither the departmental authorities nor the Tribunal could alter the reckoning date or relax the limitation in the absence of any enabling provision. The authorities cited by the appellant were distinguished on the ground that they did not authorise rewriting the time limit fixed by the notification in the present scheme.
Conclusion: The limitation had to be computed from the date of Let Export Order, not from the date of receipt of invoices, and the refund claim filed beyond that period was time-barred.
Ratio Decidendi: When a refund or rebate notification prescribes a specific statutory starting point and time limit, the authorities and the Tribunal must give effect to it as written and cannot substitute a different reckoning date or condone delay unless the instrument itself permits such relaxation.