2018 (4) TMI 479 – CESTAT BANGALORE – TMI – 100% EOU – refund claim – rejection on the ground that the refund claim was beyond the time limit of one year – Section 11B of the CEA – Held that: – Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE&CST, Bangalore Vs. Span Infotech (India) Pvt Ltd. [2018 (2) TMI 946 – CESTAT BANGALORE] has held that in respect of export of services, the relevant date for purposes of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claims under Rule 5 of the CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRC is received, in cases where the refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis.
–
Matter remanded to the original authority to compute the refund from the last day of the quarter in which the FIRCs are received – appeal allowed by way of remand. – ST/COD/20440/2017 in ST/ 21327/2017-SM in ST/21327/2017-SM – 20303/2018 – Dated:- 20-2-2018 – MR. SS GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent(AR), For the Appellant Shri Sh
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the refund claim was beyond the time limit of one year in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who vide the common impugned order disposed of three appeals. 4. Heard the learned AR and the counsel for the assessee. 5. The learned AR submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that for the purpose of Section 1 1B read with Notification No.27/2012-CE, the h date of export of service. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in the present case stands settled by the recent judgment of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal wherein it has been held that the relevant date for the purpose of Section 1 1B would be the last day of the quarter in which the FIRCs are received in case of export of service. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of mater
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
undai Motors [2015(39) STR 984 (AP)]. 12. The related question for consideration is whether the time limit is to be restricted to the date of F/RC or can be considered from the end of the quarter. The Tribunal in the case of Site/ India Ltd. (supra) has observed that the relevant date can be taken as the end of the quarter in which F/RC is received since the refund claim is filed for the quarter. 13. Revenue has expressed the view that relevant date in the case of export of services may be adopted on the same lines as the amendment carried out in the Notification No.27/2012, w.e.f. 01/03/2016. Essentially after this amendment the relevant date is to be considered as the date of receipt of foreign exchange, While this proposition appears attractive, we are also persuaded to keep in view the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vatika Township (supra), in which the Constitutional Bench has laid down the guideline that any beneficial amendment to the statute may be
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =