2018 (9) TMI 563

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iculty and tried to send fax for adjournment, which was not received by the Registry. 2. Inasmuch as in the order itself opportunity has been given to the appellant to apply for restoration, I recall the said final order and restore the appeal to its original number and proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as the short issue is involved. 3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture and export of Leather Footwear. They were paying service tax on 'reverse charge basis', in respect of services obtained by them from foreign service provider. The period involved in the present appeal is prior to 18.04.2006. 4. Subsequently, in terms of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in the case of Indian National Shipowners' Associ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Monnet International Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi reported at 2017 (3) GSTL 380 (Tri.- Del.) wherein the refunds filed beyond the period of limitation as provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were allowed by observing that at the relevant time there was no authority of law to collect service tax on the activity carried out by the assessee and as such retention of the unauthorized collected amount by the Department is not permissible. 6. After hearing learned AR and after going through the impugned order, I find that there is no dispute on facts. Admittedly, during the relevant period the appellant had discharged its tax liability on reverse charge basis in respect of services received from a for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from the relevant date, unless said payment of tax/duty was under protest or in terms of the provisional assessments. The Tribunal working within the four corners of the Act is required to decide all the disputes falling under the Act, in terms of the provisions of the Act only. This has been so held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Porcelain Electrical Mfg. Co. vs. Collector of C. Ex., New Delhi reported at 1998 (98) ELT 583 (S.C.). It stands held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that refund claims filed before the Departmental Authorities are to be governed by the time limit provided under the Statute and general law of limitation is not available to the Revenue Authorities. It stands further held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that ....