2018 (7) TMI 1445 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Refund claim of service tax paid erroneously – refund was rejected on the ground of Time Limitation – Section 11B of the Central Excise Act – the appellant has prayed that the time limit under Section 11B will not be applicable since the tax has been paid by mistake when there was no tax liability – unjust enrichment.
–
Held that:- The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Veer Overseas [2018 (4) TMI 910 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH] has been held that the time limits prescribed under Section 11B will govern all refund claims of Service Tax – refund rightly denied.
–
Unjust enrichment – Held that:- Perusal of some of the sample tickets/ booking confirmations indicates that no Service Tax has been recovered along with fare. This fact has also been categorically certified by the Chartered Accountant after perusal of the books of accounts of the appellant for the relevant period – rejection of refund on this ground not tenable.
–
Appe
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d of time bar. Part of the refund, which was filed within the time limit was rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment. The findings were upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal has been filed. 2. With the above background we heard Shri Sandeep Mukherjee, CA for the appellant as well as Shri G.R. Singh, Ld. DR for the Revenue. 3. On the ground of time bar, he argued that the time limits specified in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act will not be applicable to the facts of the present case, since the activity for which Service Tax was paid was not a taxable service during the relevant time and the tax was paid by mistake. In this connection he relied on the decision of the Tribunal in case of Monnet International Ltd. 2017 (3) GSTL 380 (Tri.-Del). 4. On the ground of unjust enrichment, he submitted that the appellant has never charged or collected Service Tax from the passengers at the time of issue of tickets. In support of such contentions he submitted the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nd claims. A part of the refund claims have been rejected on the ground of time bar, since the claims have been filed beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 11B. In this connection the appellant has prayed that the time limit under Section 11B will not be applicable since the tax has been paid by mistake when there was no tax liability. In this connection we have perused the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Veer Overseas (supra). Wherein it has been held that the time limits prescribed under Section 11B will govern all refund claims of Service Tax. BY following the decision of the Larger Bench, we find no infirmity in the view taken by lower Authorities in rejecting the claim of refund on the ground of time bar and we uphold the same. 7. Portion of refund filed within time limit under Section 11B has been rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment. The claim of the appellant is that they have not recovered Service Tax from the passengers to whom tick
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =