https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448491 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal regarding refund of excess service tax paid. The appellant had deposited 100% service tax when only 50% was required (as service recipient ONGC had already paid 50%), resulting in 150% total deposit instead of 100%. The department rejected the refund application citing limitation under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. CESTAT held that the relevant date for computing limitation was the HC order date (12.12.2017), not the tax payment date, making the refund application filed on 12.03.2018 within the prescribed time limit. The tribunal ruled that excess payment without legal authority and payment under protest exempted the case from Section 11B limitation. The department was directed to refund the excess amount with proportionate interest. en-us Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jan 2024 08:22:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448491 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal regarding refund of excess service tax paid. The appellant had deposited 100% service tax when only 50% was required (as service recipient ONGC had already paid 50%), resulting in 150% total deposit instead of 100%. The department rejected the refund application citing limitation under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. CESTAT held that the relevant date for computing limitation was the HC order date (12.12.2017), not the tax payment date, making the refund application filed on 12.03.2018 within the prescribed time limit. The tribunal ruled that excess payment without legal authority and payment under protest exempted the case from Section 11B limitation. The department was directed to refund the excess amount with proportionate interest. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448491