2016 (12) TMI 1332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The present 20 appeals have been filed by different appellants who are the residents of Ranka Nest against the common order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the order dated 26.11.2014 vide which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed 22 applications claiming refund of service tax paid by them, being barred by limitation. Since a common question is involved in all the appeals and there is one common impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in all the cases, therefore I proceed to dispose of all the 20 appeals by the common order. 2.  Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are the residents of Ranka Nest situated at No. 35/1, KKS Road, Srirampuram, Bangalore and all of them have filed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....consultant for the appellants submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law as both the authorities have wrongly returned the findings that the amount was paid by the Developer under the heading 'Construction of Commercial or Industrial Construction Services' and held that the clarification issued by the CBEC is not applicable. He further submitted that the findings that the developer has registered under the category of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Services' is only a procedural error and cannot take away the eligibility of refund of service tax paid by the appellants. The learned consultant further submitted that the appellants filed refund only after the clarification was issued by the Central Board of Excise an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed within time limit prescribed under Central Excise Act, 1944. e)  Miles India Limited - 1987 (30) E.L.T. 641 (S.C) In this case the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Appellate Tribunal as well as Customs Authorities bound by statutory period of limitation - Appeal dismissed as withdrawn - Recourse to alternative remedy if available, advisable - Section 27(1) of Customs Act, 1962. f)  Agro Pack - 2009 (238) E.L.T. 750 (Tri.-Ahmd.) wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held as law that limitation in terms of provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 applicable in respect of refund claims not require backing of authoritative pronouncement - Rejection of refund upheld. g)  CCE, Raipur Vs. Manorath Builder (P) Ltd. - 2010 (....