https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328449 The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that the refund claim of Rs. 72,21,075/- was barred by limitation due to being filed beyond the prescribed period. The Tribunal determined that a letter from the respondent did not constitute a refund application for past payments but rather indicated a prospective protest for future service tax payments. The case was remanded for further examination regarding a remaining amount of Rs. 32,67,569/- to ascertain its relation to Residential Complex Construction services and consider the principle of unjust enrichment. en-us Fri, 20 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328449 The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that the refund claim of Rs. 72,21,075/- was barred by limitation due to being filed beyond the prescribed period. The Tribunal determined that a letter from the respondent did not constitute a refund application for past payments but rather indicated a prospective protest for future service tax payments. The case was remanded for further examination regarding a remaining amount of Rs. 32,67,569/- to ascertain its relation to Residential Complex Construction services and consider the principle of unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 20 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328449