https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334570 A refund claim under a service tax notification that permits extension of the filing period cannot be rejected as time barred without considering the accompanying request for condonation of delay. The competent authority must exercise the discretionary power to extend time on the facts of the case and record reasons while deciding whether the delayed claim should be accepted. A two-stage approach, first on limitation and then on refund, is not required where the notification itself allows extension. The refund claim was therefore to be examined on merits along with the delay request, and rejection solely on limitation was inconsistent with the notification scheme. en-us Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334570 A refund claim under a service tax notification that permits extension of the filing period cannot be rejected as time barred without considering the accompanying request for condonation of delay. The competent authority must exercise the discretionary power to extend time on the facts of the case and record reasons while deciding whether the delayed claim should be accepted. A two-stage approach, first on limitation and then on refund, is not required where the notification itself allows extension. The refund claim was therefore to be examined on merits along with the delay request, and rejection solely on limitation was inconsistent with the notification scheme. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334570