TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 485
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cturing and trading in cotton and textile goods, and are registered with the Department. The appellants have been paying the taxes and filing the returns. 3. On the imposition of service tax under 'reverse charge mechanism' on receipt of services by a person/ company located in India, from a person located outside India, service tax was imposed under reverse charge mechanism under the provisions of Section 66A read with Notification (w.e.f. 18.04.2006). The appellant is member of Tamil Nadu Spinning Mills Association. The said association had challenged this levy under reverse charge before the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Writ Petition No. 3000/2006 and accordingly obtained interim stay order. Thus, in terms of the interim order by the Hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant that for non payment of service tax for the period 18.04.2006 onwards, it was called upon to produce various details and also called upon to appear before the Department for recording of statement. Further, giving notice that non-compliance shall invite penal action under Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code alongwith mandatory penalty. The appellants by its letter dated 01.07.2010 again reiterated, relying upon the stay order granted by the Madras High Court. In reply, Revenue again asked to produce complete details on the commission paid on export of agricultural as well as non agricultural produce during the period 2006-07 to 2009-10. In response thereto, the appellants deposited the service tax under dispute, by four differen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ims have been rejected on the ground that the appellant should have filed the refund claims as per Notification No. 41/2007-ST, as amended by Notification No. 17/2009-ST and 18/2009-ST. It has been observed that notification though 17/2009-ST, exempts service tax on various taxable services including those governed by Section 65(105)(zzb), but the said notification is prospective in nature. Whereas Notification No. 41/2007-ST stipulates for filing of refund on quarterly basis, within sixty days from the end of the relevant quarter, during which the goods have been exported. Accordingly, it was held that the refund claim is barred by limitation. 7. The appellants have contended that the limitation have been revised to one year, vide Notific....