TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 895
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Certificate) had expired, is assailed in this appeal. 2. Appellant M/s. Mobility App Consultant, an advertising agency service provider, sought for refund of CENVAT credit of Service Tax of Rs.5,03,878/- through 2 refund applications for 2 quarters in respect of 18 FIRCs received between 01.01.2017 and 30.06.2017 that was disallowed by the Adjudicating Authority as it was treated to be a time barred claim, except one FIRC for Rs.4,357/-. The said order has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by distinguishing Larger Bench decision of this Tribunal made in Span Infotech Pvt. Ltd. case reported in 2018-TIOL-516-CESTAT-LB on the ground that the period for the refund claim pertains to the period after amended Notification No. 14/20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Larger Bench decision in Span Infotech Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and therefore learned Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly rejected the Appellant's refund claim seeking refund of amounts shown in FIRC received above one year, since it was filed after laps of stipulated one year period, for which interference in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by the Tribunal is uncalled for. 5. Heard submissions from both the sides and perused the case record. The only logic that can be put forth in this case is that Appellant had plenty of scope to seek refund of the disputed amount before the quarter ending March, 2018 and June, 2018 in order to cover its claim within the period of limitation. But the same logic would not sustain primarily on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... claims under Rule 5 of the CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which FIRC was received, in cases where the refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis. 5.2 In the instant case Appellant has made it declaration in writing that they being exporter and supplier to domestic market were filing returns on quarterly basis and the last date of filing of return upon receipt of FIRC for these 2 quarters, which was erroneously placed at alternate columns in the Adjudicating Authority's orders, has well been taken care of by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order passed at para 2 of the Order-in-Appeal dated 28.06.2019. I am, therefore, of the considered view that findings of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Span Infotech Pvt. Ltd. (....