https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435736 In SEZ refund claims for service tax on input services used for authorised operations, the one-year limitation in paragraph 3(III)(e) of Notification No. 12/2013-ST is not to be applied mechanically to Table-II claims routed through an Input Service Distributor. The relevant document is the ISD invoice, and the refund claim becomes actionable when the SEZ unit receives the distributed credit particulars, so limitation cannot be computed as in a direct payment claim. In the beneficial SEZ exemption regime, any minor delay is procedural and should be construed liberally where substantive eligibility is otherwise established, allowing condonation to preserve the exemption's object. en-us Thu, 23 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Mar 2023 10:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435736 In SEZ refund claims for service tax on input services used for authorised operations, the one-year limitation in paragraph 3(III)(e) of Notification No. 12/2013-ST is not to be applied mechanically to Table-II claims routed through an Input Service Distributor. The relevant document is the ISD invoice, and the refund claim becomes actionable when the SEZ unit receives the distributed credit particulars, so limitation cannot be computed as in a direct payment claim. In the beneficial SEZ exemption regime, any minor delay is procedural and should be construed liberally where substantive eligibility is otherwise established, allowing condonation to preserve the exemption's object. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435736