https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361218 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling that the rejection of a refund claim as time-barred was unjustified. It held that the relevant date for considering refund claims under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules in the case of export of services should be the end of the quarter in which the Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC) is received, not the date of the invoice. This decision was supported by previous rulings and a High Court decision, emphasizing a prospective view on burden-imposing provisions. en-us Tue, 29 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jun 2018 19:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361218 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling that the rejection of a refund claim as time-barred was unjustified. It held that the relevant date for considering refund claims under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules in the case of export of services should be the end of the quarter in which the Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC) is received, not the date of the invoice. This decision was supported by previous rulings and a High Court decision, emphasizing a prospective view on burden-imposing provisions. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 29 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361218