TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 1844
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-in-Appeal No. 02/2018 HYD dated 12.01.2018. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration, after filtering out unnecessary details are, the respondent herein had filed two refund applications under Rule 5B of Cenvat Credit Rules for the half years April - September 2014 and October 2014 - March 2015 on 20.06.2016. It is undisputed that the respondent is eligible for the refund of unutilized....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filing of service tax returns as prescribed under Rule 7. It is a submission in the case in hand the respondent herein had filed a revised return within the 90 days as per the provisions of Rule 7B and by considering the revised returns, the First Appellate Authority has held that the refund claims are within time. He would submit that the explanation added to Rule 7B clearly indicates that if th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has to be considered as hit by limitation or otherwise. 6. First Appellate Authority after reproducing notification in paragaraph 7.1, reproduced the rule provisions of Rule 7, 7A and 7B of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and held as under: 7. From the provisions at 7B, it can be seen that an assessee may submit a revised return within 90 days from the date of his Original Return and as per the exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he period October 2014 to March 2015 on the ground of limitation. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions and findings, it emerges that i) refund claim filed by the appellant for the period April 2014 to September 2014 is barred by limitation and the finding of the lower authority is correct and needs no intervention. ii) the date of filing the revised ST3 Return should be reckoned as the da....