https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388289 The tribunal allowed the appeal for condonation of delay in filing refund claims under Notification No. 27/2012-CE N.T dated 18.06.2012. The appellant's claims were initially rejected as time-barred, but the tribunal considered the end of the quarter for quarterly filings under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. Relying on Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd., the tribunal held the refund claims were within the time limit. This decision emphasized the importance of consistent interpretation and adherence to legal principles, overturning the rejection and granting the appellant's refund claims. en-us Thu, 31 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:32:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388289 The tribunal allowed the appeal for condonation of delay in filing refund claims under Notification No. 27/2012-CE N.T dated 18.06.2012. The appellant's claims were initially rejected as time-barred, but the tribunal considered the end of the quarter for quarterly filings under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. Relying on Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd., the tribunal held the refund claims were within the time limit. This decision emphasized the importance of consistent interpretation and adherence to legal principles, overturning the rejection and granting the appellant's refund claims. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 31 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388289