https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765195 The CESTAT New Delhi dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of service tax refund for government work performed April-December 2015. The refund application was filed beyond the six-month limitation period under section 102 of the Finance Act. The tribunal held that statutory time limits must be strictly adhered to, rejecting appellant's argument that tax collected without authority carries no limitation period. The court distinguished the Karnataka HC judgment in KVR Construction, noting it did not consider section 102 provisions. The refund claim was properly rejected as time-barred, with neither tribunal nor revenue authorities having power to extend statutory limitations. en-us Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765195 The CESTAT New Delhi dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of service tax refund for government work performed April-December 2015. The refund application was filed beyond the six-month limitation period under section 102 of the Finance Act. The tribunal held that statutory time limits must be strictly adhered to, rejecting appellant's argument that tax collected without authority carries no limitation period. The court distinguished the Karnataka HC judgment in KVR Construction, noting it did not consider section 102 provisions. The refund claim was properly rejected as time-barred, with neither tribunal nor revenue authorities having power to extend statutory limitations. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765195