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 - Date of filing of refund through ACES should be reckoned as date of filing of refund claim: CESTAT

 

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAY 15, 2018: THE refund claim filed by the appellant under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 was partly rejected for an amount of Rs.24,16,855/- on the ground that the refund claim was filed beyond one year from the date of invoice raised for providing the export services.

The Commissioner (Appeals) also observed that the refund claim filed online through ACES portal of CBEC website shall not be taken as date of filing of refund for the reason that the refund claim in physical form along with all the documents were filed on 6.1.2016 and, therefore, the refund was held to be time barred.

Before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted that as per the judgment in the case of Boston Scientific India Pvt. Ltd.– 2017-TIOL-195-CESTAT-CHD, the date of filing of refund electronically through ACES should be considered as date of filing of refund, even though the physical copy of the claim along with supporting documents were filed subsequently. Reliance is also placed on the Larger Bench decision in Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. - 2018-TIOL-516-CESTAT-BANG-LB. to emphasize that the refund has to be considered as filed on time.

The Bench observed –

++ The lower authority considered the date of filing is the date when the physical refund claim along with all the documents were filed whereas the appellant had already filed the refund claim online through ACES portal of CBEC website.

++ I am surprised that in one hand the Revenue has allowed to file refund claim online through ACES and in other hand, they are disputing such refund claim on the ground of time bar. Learned counsel also submitted that there was no provision for filing the documents online. Therefore, they have filed a physical copy of the refund claim along with all the documents. The date of filing of refund through ACES should be reckoned as date of filing of refund claim.

++ I further observe that the refund claim was admittedly filed within one year from the quarter ending to which the refund pertained. As per the Larger Bench judgment in the case of Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), one year for the purpose of Section 11B should be taken at the end of the quarter and not either from date of invoice or from the date of receipt of FIRC.

Concluding that on both counts, the refund claim has to be considered as filed well within time, the impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

(See 2018-TIOL-1520-CESTAT-MUM)


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