2016 (6) TMI 414 - AT - Service Tax

Refund - Period of limitation - Commercial or Industrial Construction Services - Service tax paid on the output service on which there was no levy - amount paid was without authority of law - Held that - at the time of payment the assessee pays the amount under a particular head such as service tax, excise duty etc. and when subsequently it is found that this amount is not payable, the same amount stand refundable to the assessee and such refund is treated as refund of service tax/duty only. Therefore, the provision if any applies for refund of such duty is only provided under Section 11B and there is no any other provision. Any amount which is to be refunded shall be refunded in accordance with Section 11B which include the condition of time limitation. The issue has been clearly settled by the Hon ble Supreme Court that even though the refund of duty recovered without authority of law but for the refund claims made before the departmental authorities, limitation provided under the Customs Act/Central Excise Act or the Rules made thereunder is applicable. The authorities functioning under the Act bound by its provision. Since the refund of any amount is governed by Section 11B and there being no other provision, this Tribunal being a creature under the Central Excise/Customs Act cannot go beyond the statute and therefore cannot relax the time limitation provided under the statute. Therefore, the refund claims being filed after one year is hit by limitation and therefore correctly rejected by the lower authority. The impugned orders are upheld. - Decided against the appellant

Summary

Issues:
- Refund claim on service tax paid during a specific period.
- Applicability of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to service tax matters.
- Limitation period for filing refund claims.
- Interpretation of legal provisions and relevant case laws.

Refund Claim on Service Tax Paid:
The appellants, registered as service providers under Commercial or Industrial Construction Services, filed refund claims for service tax paid during a specific period. The claims were based on providing services to a non-profit educational organization. The Asstt. Commissioner rejected the claims as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner(Appeals) partly allowed the appeals, leading to the current appeal.

Applicability of Section 11B to Service Tax Matters:
The appellant's counsel argued that since the service was not taxable, the payment was without legal authority, making Section 11B inapplicable. However, the Tribunal found that Section 11B is the sole provision for refunding any amount paid under the Central Excise Act, applicable to service tax matters. The Tribunal emphasized that refundable amounts must be processed under Section 11B, including the time limitation provision.

Limitation Period for Filing Refund Claims:
Both parties cited relevant judgments to support their arguments. The Revenue contended that the statutory time limit under Section 11B must be adhered to for refund claims. The Tribunal agreed, emphasizing that the limitation prescribed in Section 11B is mandatory for refunding any amount, even if paid without legal authority.

Interpretation of Legal Provisions and Case Laws:
The Tribunal analyzed various Supreme Court judgments and legal precedents to support its decision. It highlighted that the refund of any amount is governed by Section 11B, and there is no alternative provision for refunds. The Tribunal clarified that even if the payment was made without legal authority, Section 11B's time limitation applies. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the lower authority's rejection of refund claims filed after the statutory one-year limit.

---