Quarterly refund limitation under Cenvat rules runs from quarter-end, and ambiguity is resolved in favour of the assessee.

Refund under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules was held not to be time barred because the one-year limitation for quarterly refund claims must be computed from the last date of the relevant quarter. The Tribunal applied Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT), which requires exporters of taxable services to file one refund claim for each quarter, and held that Notification No. 14/2016-CE (NT) did not alter that position. Where ambiguity existed between quarterly filing and a one-year period from receipt of foreign exchange, the benefit was given to the assessee. The refund rejection on limitation was therefore unsustainable and the claim was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was time barred, or whether the limitation had to be computed from the end of the quarter for which the refund claim was filed.

Analysis: The refund was rejected only on the ground of limitation under Notification No. 14/2016-CE (NT) dated 01.03.2016. The Tribunal noted that under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012, an exporter of taxable services is required to file one refund claim for each quarter. Relying on earlier Tribunal decisions, it held that the relevant date for computing the one-year limitation must be taken as the last date of the quarter, and that this position was not altered by Notification No. 14/2016-CE (NT). It further accepted that where the notification creates ambiguity between a quarterly filing requirement and a one-year period from receipt of foreign exchange, the benefit must go to the assessee.

Conclusion: The refund claim filed on 15.12.2017 was within time when computed from the end of the quarter ending 31.12.2016. The rejection of refund as time barred was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.

---