2018 (5) TMI 557

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent as "Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru South, Queen's Road, Bengaluru - 560 001" and also the miscellaneous application for early hearing and take up the appeal for final disposal. 2. The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 16.11.2010 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has modified the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal restricted to the period from 16.5.2008 to September 2008. 3. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are registered with the Service Tax under the category of „Scientific and Technical Consultancy Service' and are engaged in export of IT software service. they filed refund claim on 18.12.2008 under the provisions of Rule 5 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he date of receipt of payment towards exports effected. He further submitted that the time limit of one year cannot be computed from the date of availment of credit and should be computed from the end of the quarter, as the claims of a quarter should be preferred within the period of one year. The claim for the quarter ending October - December 2007 is preferred within one year and the same is within time limit as prescribed under Section 11B of the Act. He further submitted that the Department cannot raise the issue of classification of service in a refund application. The assessee being a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) and having obtained registration with the Service Tax Department under the category of „Scientific and Technical C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are eligible input service. Further, insofar as time bar is concerned, this issue has been considered by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal and the Larger Bench vide its Interim Order No.4/2018 dated 9.2.2018 in the case of CST vs. Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. has held that the relevant date for the purpose of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs is received, in cases where refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis. Further, I find that the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Axa Business Services Pvt. Ltd. cited supra has held as under: "5. The first ground in which the refund stands rejected is that ....