SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
ST - Excess amount paid by appellant by way of service tax can be refunded subject to provisions of Sec 11B only - Tribunal is a creature of statute and needs to function within its four walls: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, FEB 09, 2017: WITH effect from 01.05.2006 a new service of 'sale of space or time for advertisement services' was introduced in the statute book and appellant started payment of service tax under the new category.

However, on actual realization of the value of services in January 2007, the service tax pertaining to the period May to December 2006 was paid once again. Net result was that the appellant ended up paying towards the service tax, amount of Rs.14,92,703/- twice.

Therefore, the appellant filed a refund claim on 25.07.2007.

The original authority as well as the Commissioner (A) held that a part of the refund claim amounting to Rs.4,23,454/- was time barred inasmuch as the refund claim has been filed beyond the period of one year specified u/s 11B of CEA, 1944.

Aggrieved, the appellant is before the CESTAT and submits that the amount should be refunded to them without considering time bar since the amount has been paid as service tax when it was not required to have been paid.

Support is inter alia drawn from the decisions in UOI Vs. ITC Ltd. 1993 (67) ELT 3 (SC), Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd - 2016-TIOL-47-CESTAT-AHM and Hexacom (I) Ltd. - 2003-TIOL-263-CESTAT-DEL.

The DR reiterated the impugned order and emphasized that any amount, before being refunded, has to satisfy the time limit specified under section 11B.

The Bench observed –

+ There is no doubt that the portion of the refund claim rejected to the extent of Rs.4,23,454/- pertains to the excess amount of service tax paid more than 1 year prior to filing of refund claim. Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, which has been made applicable to refund of service tax clearly states that the refund claim needs to be filed within a period of one year from the relevant date.

+ The excess amount has been paid by the appellant by way of service tax, and hence can be refunded only subject to provision of Section 11B which governs ground of refund of any service tax in this statute.

+ In the matter of reliance placed on the apex court decision, the CESTAT observed that whereas the Supreme Court as well as the High Courts are vested with special powers under the Constitution, the Tribunal is a creature of the statute and needs to function within the four walls of the statute.

Noting that the Bench is unable to extend the benefit of such decision of the Apex Court, the Bench held that the refund filed beyond the time limit of one year has been rightly rejected as time barred by the lower authorities.

The appeal was dismissed.

(See 2017-TIOL-370-CESTAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST