https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221509 Refund claims for service tax on input services used in export of goods had to comply strictly with Notification No. 41/2007-ST, including the prescribed limitation period, because the notification operated as an exemption-cum-refund mechanism. The later amendment in Notification No. 32/2008-ST was treated as prospective and could not be applied to claims already filed for earlier periods. The CBEC clarification did not assist the claimant, as the reference to a March-June quarter was regarded as erroneous and did not create a substantive entitlement. Claims filed beyond time were therefore inadmissible. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 May 2013 17:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221509 Refund claims for service tax on input services used in export of goods had to comply strictly with Notification No. 41/2007-ST, including the prescribed limitation period, because the notification operated as an exemption-cum-refund mechanism. The later amendment in Notification No. 32/2008-ST was treated as prospective and could not be applied to claims already filed for earlier periods. The CBEC clarification did not assist the claimant, as the reference to a March-June quarter was regarded as erroneous and did not create a substantive entitlement. Claims filed beyond time were therefore inadmissible. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221509