2019 (11) TMI 1267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tive for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim was rejected as time barred. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in Construction Service and the refund claim filed is with regard to Construction Service provided to the Government for building of MES. The said service was exempted from service tax vide entr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the time limit prescribed under Section 11B of the Act is not applicable as held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of National Institute of Public Finance & Policy vs. Commissioner of Service Tax 2019 (20) GSTL 330 (DEL.), the same has been followed by this Tribunal in the case of Radian Textiles Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana 2019 (26) GSTL 197 (Tri.-Chan.). Further....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecision is very much relevant to deal the case in hand which is extracted herein below:- "(1) Where a refund application was filed by the manufacturer/purchaser beyond the period prescribed by the Central Excise Act/Customs Act in that behalf, such petition must be held to be untenable in law. Even if in any appeal, suit or writ petition, direction has been given that the refund applicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m the date of payment. 7. Now, from the facts of the case, it is to be seen that whether the appellant is claiming the refund of service tax or an amount paid by them mistakenly. It is an admitted position in the facts of the case that during the period March 2015, the service provided by the appellant to MES was exempt from payment of service tax. Therefore, the amount paid by the appellant is....