https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78613 The High Court addressed the issue of refund of service tax paid in relation to subscription of a chit fund. It was held that the petitioner paid the tax upon demand by tax authorities, not due to a mistake of law. The 2015 amendment to the Finance Act was deemed substantive, not clarificatory, with prospective effect. Refunds for taxes paid before the amendment were permissible within the extended one-year limitation period from the judgment date. The court dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner's failure to apply within the extended time limit set by the court. en-us Wed, 19 Jun 2024 12:01:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 12:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78613 The High Court addressed the issue of refund of service tax paid in relation to subscription of a chit fund. It was held that the petitioner paid the tax upon demand by tax authorities, not due to a mistake of law. The 2015 amendment to the Finance Act was deemed substantive, not clarificatory, with prospective effect. Refunds for taxes paid before the amendment were permissible within the extended one-year limitation period from the judgment date. The court dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner's failure to apply within the extended time limit set by the court. Highlights Service Tax Wed, 19 Jun 2024 12:01:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78613