https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351002 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of a refund claim for unutilized input service credit, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the limitation period for filing refund claims under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appellant's argument that the relevant date for filing should be one year from the last day of the quarter, not the date of export, was dismissed based on the Madras High Court judgments. The Tribunal affirmed the decision, highlighting the significance of complying with statutory timelines and judicial precedents in refund claim matters under the Central Excise Act. en-us Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 08:01:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351002 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of a refund claim for unutilized input service credit, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the limitation period for filing refund claims under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appellant's argument that the relevant date for filing should be one year from the last day of the quarter, not the date of export, was dismissed based on the Madras High Court judgments. The Tribunal affirmed the decision, highlighting the significance of complying with statutory timelines and judicial precedents in refund claim matters under the Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351002