2016 (12) TMI 1531

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r carrying out activities such as billing etc of the electricity distributed by the appellant to consumers. The service tax had been paid by the latter and reimbursed by the appellant under "Business Auxiliary Service" (BAS). The refund was claimed before the original authority arguing that no service tax is payable on this activity by M/s Aditi Computers. It is claimed that the activities of billing done by M/s Aditi will not be liable to payment of service tax under BAS since these activities are in the form of "Information Technology Services"(ITS). The refund claim stands rejected both on merits as well as on the ground of time bar vide the order of the original authority dated 6.8.2009. The rejection of refund claim was challenged befo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been rejected as time barred by the original adjudicating authority. 5.  We have heard both sides and perused the records. We find that the appeal can be decided on the point by time bar. Hence, we are not discussing the merits of present refund claim. The service tax stands paid during the period August, 2004 to April, 2006 and the refund has been filed on 22.11.2007. The claim has been held to the time bared under section 11B of the Act, as it has been filed beyond the time limit of one year from the date of payment of service tax by M/s. Aditi Computers. The argument raised by the appellant is that the one year time limit will not be applicable to the present refund claim, since the service tax has been paid on a service which is....