https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775576 The CESTAT Chennai upheld the dismissal of the refund claim as barred by the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, applicable via Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. Relying on the Supreme Court's nine-judge bench ruling in Mafatlal Industries Ltd, the tribunal affirmed that refund claims under Central Excise or Customs laws must comply with the prescribed limitation periods and procedures. Even if service tax was paid without proper classification, the claim must follow the refund provisions under the Finance Act. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention against the applicability of Section 11B's time limits, confirming the constitutional validity and mandatory nature of these provisions. The appeal was dismissed, and the lower authority's order was upheld without interference. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775576 The CESTAT Chennai upheld the dismissal of the refund claim as barred by the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, applicable via Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. Relying on the Supreme Court's nine-judge bench ruling in Mafatlal Industries Ltd, the tribunal affirmed that refund claims under Central Excise or Customs laws must comply with the prescribed limitation periods and procedures. Even if service tax was paid without proper classification, the claim must follow the refund provisions under the Finance Act. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention against the applicability of Section 11B's time limits, confirming the constitutional validity and mandatory nature of these provisions. The appeal was dismissed, and the lower authority's order was upheld without interference. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775576