https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411483 Refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules for export of services was held not to be barred by limitation under Section 11B because the claim could be made only after realization of export proceeds, when the bank certificate required for the claim became available. The relevant date for computing limitation in such refund claims was treated as the date of realization of consideration, not the date applied by the department. The rejection order was also found to lack adequate reasons and any proper computation showing time-bar. The refund sanction was therefore upheld and the revenue's challenge failed. en-us Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:49:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411483 Refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules for export of services was held not to be barred by limitation under Section 11B because the claim could be made only after realization of export proceeds, when the bank certificate required for the claim became available. The relevant date for computing limitation in such refund claims was treated as the date of realization of consideration, not the date applied by the department. The rejection order was also found to lack adequate reasons and any proper computation showing time-bar. The refund sanction was therefore upheld and the revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411483