Service tax refund limitation must follow the service tax framework, not excise-law limits, when the claim concerns input services for exports.

An appeal against rejection of refund of service tax on input services used for export goods had to be assessed under the limitation regime applicable to service tax proceedings, because the claim arose from service tax paid under the refund notification for service tax. The appellate authority erred in treating the matter as governed by excise-law limitation and in rejecting the appeal solely as time-barred on that basis. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on the correct service tax framework, without any merits determination by the appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal against rejection of refund of service tax on input services used for export goods was governed by the limitation applicable to service tax proceedings and not by the limitation applicable to excise proceedings.

Analysis: The refund claim arose from service tax paid on input services and was made under the refund notification for service tax. The appellate authority had rejected the appeal on the premise that it ought to have been filed under excise law and that, on that basis, the delay was beyond condonable limits. Since the dispute related to service tax refund, the limitation applicable to service tax proceedings had to be applied. The matter had not been examined on merits by the appellate authority because it was rejected only on limitation.

Conclusion: The limitation applicable to service tax proceedings was required to be considered, and the rejection on the basis of excise-law limitation was not sustained. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a refund claim concerns service tax, the appeal and its limitation must be examined under the service tax framework and not by applying excise-law limitation.

---