https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758440 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal for refund of service tax paid on ocean freight. The appellant filed refund application on 23.11.2020 following Gujarat HC decision in SAL Steel Ltd. Revenue rejected claim as time-barred under Section 11B(5)(B)(ec) of Central Excise Act, 1944. However, SC dismissed revenue's appeal in Kiri Dyes Chemicals Ltd. on 01.09.2023, holding service tax levy unsustainable. Appellant could file refund within one year from SC decision i.e., by 31.08.2024. Since application was filed much before this deadline, and Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 only requires compliance with Section 11B(2), the refund claim was valid. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 10 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Sep 2024 18:07:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758440 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal for refund of service tax paid on ocean freight. The appellant filed refund application on 23.11.2020 following Gujarat HC decision in SAL Steel Ltd. Revenue rejected claim as time-barred under Section 11B(5)(B)(ec) of Central Excise Act, 1944. However, SC dismissed revenue's appeal in Kiri Dyes Chemicals Ltd. on 01.09.2023, holding service tax levy unsustainable. Appellant could file refund within one year from SC decision i.e., by 31.08.2024. Since application was filed much before this deadline, and Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 only requires compliance with Section 11B(2), the refund claim was valid. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 10 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758440