TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1598
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulated Cenvat Credit for export services have been set aside and have been remanded with the direction to re-examine the issue of limitation observing the refund claims to be barred by time. The findings in order-in-original while allowing some refund that the relevant date in respect of refund claims is the very first day of the relevant quarter is not acceptable on the ground of it by time barred. 2. The facts relevant to adjudicate this appeal, in brief, are as follows: The appellant herein is engaged in providing IT Enabled services to foreign customers and is registered under the category of 'Business Support Services' with effect from 21/01/2010. They have filed following applications to claim the refund of Cenvat credit under Noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der-in-Original No. 81-87 the all seven refund claims total amounting to Rs. 64,65,318/- were rejected, being barred by time. The said findings have been upheld vide the order under challenge. Being aggrieved the appellant is before us. 4. We have heard Mr. Kashish Kumar Gutpa, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri G R Singh Ld. DR for revenue. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the claims have been rejected forming an opinion that period of one year has to reckon from the date of invoice. Whereas, this issue has been settled by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal to the effect that the period of one year as is mentioned in Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, which is made applicable to service tax by virtue of pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... back the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority for re-examination. Also there is no infirmity in the order, wherein it is observed that the relevant date in respect of refund claim cannot be first date of the relevant quarter. It is rightly held to be the date of invoice as relevant for the purpose of ascertaining the time limit of one year. The appeal is, accordingly, prayed to be dismissed. 8. After hearing the parties and perusing the entire records we are of the opinion as follows: Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is relevant in respect of refund of Cenvat Credit where manufacturer either clears the final product or intermediate product for export without payment of duty under bond or a service provider provides outputs s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ime limit prescribed under Section 11 B in respect of filling of refund claim is to be applied from the date of receipt of payment for export of services or can be considered from the end of the quarter in which such payments have been received. The same has been answered in the following words; The definition of relevant date in Section 11B does not specifically cover the case of export of services. Hence, it is necessary to interpret the provisions constructively so as to give it meaning such that the objective of the provisions; i.e. to grant refund of unutilized Cenvat Credit, it facilitated. By reference to the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as well as the successor provisions i.e. the Export of Service Tax Rules, 2005, we note that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e period of one year has to reckon from the date of invoice are hereby set aside. The above observations as far as relevant date is concerned are hereby affirmed. Since the matter has already been remanded by the Commissioner (Appeals) to the Adjudicating Authority, also in view of the admitted fact that the impugned refund claims were filed on quarterly basis, we are of the opinion that the refund claims all still to be verified for limitation purposes however on the basis of principle held herein hence we direct that the Adjudicating Authority, to re- examining the claims while taking the end of the quarter in which FIRC is received as the relevant date for determining the time limit. Keeping in view the pendency of the matter for more th....