2019 (11) TMI 246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt charges. Department was of the view that the refund claim ought to have been filed within six months from the date on which Section 104 of Finance Act, 2017 was introduced and received assent of the President. The refund claim was thus dismissed on the ground of limitation. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order passed by the original authority. Hence the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 2. Ld. Counsel Shri S. Viswanathan appeared and argued for the appellant. He submitted that as per Section 104 (1) of Finance Act, 2017 service tax paid on development charges is exempted. It was also provided in sub-section (3) that refund claim has to be filed within 6 months from the date on which the amendment receives assent of the Presid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellant and not due to any act of omission or commission on the part of the appellant. Further, the Hon'ble High Court in the case of JSW Dharmatar Port Pvt. Ltd Vs UOI 2019 (20) G.S.T.L 721 (Bom.) had occasion to consider a similar issue and held that the benefit extended to the assessee by way of such exemption cannot be defeated by a narrow interpretation of the provisions. He prayed that the refund may be allowed. 3. Ld. A.R Ms.K. Komathi appeared on behalf of the department. She referred to the amended provisions of Section 104 (1) and (3) in Finance Act, 2017 . She stressed that as sub-section (3) prescribed the period of limitation 6 months from the date of which the amendment receives assent of the President. Finance Bill, 20....