https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360356 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the refund claim for service tax paid by a partnership firm engaged in construction was not time-barred. The appellant's claim of &8377; 76,64,734/- was partially granted, with a refund of &8377; 39,65,384/- approved, based on judicial precedents supporting refund claims due to mutual mistakes between the assessee and the tax department. The Tribunal held that the claim, filed within one year of a circular clarifying non-liability for service tax, was within the limitation period as per Section 11B of the CEA, 1944. The case was remanded for reconsideration within the limitation period and on merit. en-us Mon, 16 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 May 2018 06:43:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360356 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the refund claim for service tax paid by a partnership firm engaged in construction was not time-barred. The appellant's claim of &8377; 76,64,734/- was partially granted, with a refund of &8377; 39,65,384/- approved, based on judicial precedents supporting refund claims due to mutual mistakes between the assessee and the tax department. The Tribunal held that the claim, filed within one year of a circular clarifying non-liability for service tax, was within the limitation period as per Section 11B of the CEA, 1944. The case was remanded for reconsideration within the limitation period and on merit. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 16 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360356