2018 (9) TMI 1876

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....A. along with Grishma Chheda For The Respondent : Shri O.M.Shivadikar, Assistant Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per: S. K. Mohanty Brief facts of the case are that during the disputed period, the appellant had received rental income for letting out its properties for residential as well as for commercial purpose. The activities are covered under the taxable category of "Renting of immovable ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the service tax statute. Accordingly, the appellant had filed the refund application, claiming refund of service tax paid by it. The refund application was rejected by the original authority on the ground that the same is barred by limitation of time provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On appeal, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Mumbai vide impugned order dated 09.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 5. I find that refund application was rejected by the original authority vide order dated 26.02.2015 on the sole ground that the application is filed beyond the stipulated time frame and accordingly, is barred by limitation of time as per Section 11B of the Act. However, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, though has upheld rejection of refund application, but has relied upo....