2017 (11) TMI 1482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y service. The appellant had filed refund application on 18.05.2009, claiming refund of service tax of Rs. 53,73,802/- on the ground that it is a research institute substantially aided by the Ministry of Finance, where the nature of studies conducted is mostly theoretical with practical overtone usually supplied to the Ministry, other State Governments Departments, Planning Commission, Finance Commission and other research organizations. The studies are basically fiscal studies and not management studies. Thus, the appellant was of the view that it is not providing the management consultancy service and accordingly, is not liable to pay Service Tax under that category of such taxable service. Out of the refund claim amount of Rs. 53,73,802/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. KVR Construction Vs. CCE, Bangalore - 2010 (17) STR 6 (Kar.) 3. CCE (Appeals), B'lore Vs. KVR Construction - 2012 (26) STR 195 (Kar.) 4. Joshi Technologies International Vs. UOI- 2016(339) ELT 21 (Guj.) 5. Indo-Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. Vs. UOI - 2005 (185) ELT 19 (Guj.) 6. Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Indo - Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. - 2005 (186) ELT A 117 (S.C.). 7. Mera Baba Realty Associate (P) Ltd. Vs. CST, Delhi - 2017 (49) STR 257 (Del.) 8. Final Order No.52170-52171/2017 [Monnet International Ltd. Vs. CCE, New Delhi]. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submitted that since the appellant had filed the refund application under Section 11B ibid, cla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o be filed within one year from the date of payment of duty (Service Tax). Thus, the refund claim rejected by the authorities below on the ground of limitation is in conformity with the statutory provisions. 7. In context with the time limit for claiming refund application and the applicability of Section 11B ibid, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Daoba Co-operative Sugar Mills (supra) held that if the proceedings have taken under the Central Excise Act by the Department, the provisions of limitation prescribed in the Act alone will prevail with regard to applicability of the time limit for filing the refund claim. It has been further ruled that when the duty has been levied without the authority of law or without reference to an....