https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401086 A claim for refund of service tax had to comply with the statutory refund regime, including limitation and proof that the incidence of tax had not been passed on. The Court applied the principle that a service recipient cannot bypass Section 11B by asserting it bore the tax or by relying on later credit notes, and that refund law treats the payer's claim separately from a buyer's claim. In the absence of valid provisional assessment, the refund remained subject to the statutory bar. The claim was therefore held barred by limitation and untenable on unjust enrichment grounds. en-us Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401086 A claim for refund of service tax had to comply with the statutory refund regime, including limitation and proof that the incidence of tax had not been passed on. The Court applied the principle that a service recipient cannot bypass Section 11B by asserting it bore the tax or by relying on later credit notes, and that refund law treats the payer's claim separately from a buyer's claim. In the absence of valid provisional assessment, the refund remained subject to the statutory bar. The claim was therefore held barred by limitation and untenable on unjust enrichment grounds. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401086