https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770303 CESTAT Ahmedabad dismissed the appeal regarding refund of service tax paid on works contract services under Notification No. 09/2016-ST and Section 102 of Finance Act, 2016. The appellant's contract was awarded on 11.03.2015, which exceeded the stipulated cut-off date of 01.03.2015 for eligibility. The tribunal rejected arguments that tender filing date (10.02.2015) or financial bid qualification date (19.02.2015) should be considered instead of actual contract award date. The adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals) correctly rejected the refund claim, as the contract fell outside the notification's prescribed timeframe. en-us Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 May 2025 09:12:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770303 CESTAT Ahmedabad dismissed the appeal regarding refund of service tax paid on works contract services under Notification No. 09/2016-ST and Section 102 of Finance Act, 2016. The appellant's contract was awarded on 11.03.2015, which exceeded the stipulated cut-off date of 01.03.2015 for eligibility. The tribunal rejected arguments that tender filing date (10.02.2015) or financial bid qualification date (19.02.2015) should be considered instead of actual contract award date. The adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals) correctly rejected the refund claim, as the contract fell outside the notification's prescribed timeframe. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770303