2019 (12) TMI 1091

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....course of their operations and had filed refund claim for the service tax paid on these services under Notification No. 17/2011-ST dated 1st March 2011. After examining the refund claim, the adjudicating authority has found that of the amount of Rs. 10,26,812/- claimed by the appellant on merits they are eligible for a refund of only Rs. 2,26,530/-. Further, he found that the refund claim has been filed beyond the period of one year stipulated in the Notification No 17/2011. Para 3 of this Notification reads as follows:- "claim for refund should be filed within one year from the end of the manufacturing in which actual payment of service tax was made by such developer or unit to the registered service provider or such extended peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ne so and such denial of condonation has been upheld by the first appellate authority. He prays that the delay may be condoned and they may be allowed refund of the amounts which were found to be available to them on merits. He relies on the decision in the case of HPL Power Systems Ltd decided by this Bench by Final Order No A/31220-31221/2018 dated 28.09.2018 in which, overruling the decision of the lower authority, the delay in filing refund claims by the SEZ unit was condoned by this Bench. He also relies on the decision in the case of Divis Laboratories [2014(36)STR (Tri-Bang)] in which similar decision was taken. He prays that the delay may be condoned and they may be allowed refund. 4. Learned A.R. supports the impugned order as w....