https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246875 The appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, regarding a refund claim for service tax paid by mistake during April 2008 to June 2009 was dismissed. The appellant's argument that the refund application fell within the limitation period based on Notification 18/2009 was rejected, as the notification did not apply retrospectively. The Commissioner (Appeals) granted the appellant the benefit of the one-year refund claim period under Notification 17/2009, which was upheld by the Tribunal. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to the limitation periods specified in exemption notifications for filing refund claims. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jul 2015 12:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246875 The appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, regarding a refund claim for service tax paid by mistake during April 2008 to June 2009 was dismissed. The appellant's argument that the refund application fell within the limitation period based on Notification 18/2009 was rejected, as the notification did not apply retrospectively. The Commissioner (Appeals) granted the appellant the benefit of the one-year refund claim period under Notification 17/2009, which was upheld by the Tribunal. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to the limitation periods specified in exemption notifications for filing refund claims. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 03 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246875