Service tax refund remained barred by unjust enrichment and retrospective validation, leaving the appeal not maintainable.

Refund of service tax was subject to the section 11B mechanism of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as applied by section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, including the requirement that the tax incidence must not have been passed on. Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 1994 retrospectively validated the levy and collection provisions for service tax, so pending or admitted writ petitions did not suspend their operation. Until a law is declared invalid, it continues to bind the parties. On that basis, the appeal was held not maintainable and dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim and appeal were defeated by the statutory requirement that the incidence of service tax should not have been passed on, and by the retrospective validating provisions of the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis: Refund of service tax was governed by the mechanism of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable by section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was considered in the light of sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 1994, which validated retrospectively the levy and collection provisions relating to service tax. The mere pendency or admission of writ petitions challenging the law did not suspend or invalidate the statutory provisions; until a law is declared invalid, it continues to operate and bind the parties.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be not maintainable and was dismissed.

---