2019 (4) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gether in relation to the impugned order for decision. 2. Heard Shri K. Murali, AR on behalf of the Revenue. He pointed out that the Commissioner (A) has set aside the order passed by the original authority dated 11.01.2010. She held that there was no requirement of mandatory registration of the premises as a condition for claiming refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In this regard, she relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of mPortal India Wireless Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CST: 2012 (27) STR 134 (Kar.). Revenue has challenged this finding. Learned AR has submitted that since the export of output service was undertaken by the assessee without obtaining service tax registration, the refund was not a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ry 2009 to March 2009 Filed on 14/09/2009 Rs.65,61,867/- Total Rs.1,86,33,329/- 6. The first question for decision is whether the registration of the premises of the respondent is mandatory before carrying out the export of service, for being entitled to the refund in terms of Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Admittedly, there is no dispute about the factum of export of service as well as the receipt of foreign exchange for such export but the claim for refund pertains to the period prior to obtaining the registration for premises of the respondent. The Commissioner (A) has held that the requirement of registration cannot be held against the respondent by following the observations of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in mPor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... three refund claims are hit by time bar when they examined with regard to Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This Section governs the sanction of refund and specifies that the claims for refund are to be filed within a period of one year from the relevant date specified in the said Section. The Notification No.5/2006 (NT) dated 14.3.2006 provides that the refund claims are to be submitted not more than once in a quarter in a calendar year before the expiry of the period specified in Section 11B. 8. It is seen that the issue of time limitation within which refund claims are to be filed for claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 in cases of export of service has been the subject matter before the Larger Bench of the Tri....