2017 (4) TMI 385 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - N/N. 41/2007-S.T., dated 6-10-2007 - rejection for the reason that the claim was time-barred - Revenue took the view that the claim filed on 27-10-2008 has been filed after the time limit of 60 days - Held that - the clarification with N/N. 17/2009-S.T. issued by the Board is in the nature of a benefit extended to the assessees. It is to be viewed as relaxation of the conditions prescribed under N/N. 17/2009-S.T., even though a one time measure - the exports have taken place prior to the issue of the N/N. 17/2009. It is also seen that the refund claim was filed citing the earlier N/N. 41/2007-S.T. Given the benefit of relaxation in the Board Circular, it emerges that refund claim filed within a period of one year from the date of export should be allowed the benefit of refund of service tax paid in export. Since the refund has been claimed for the exports done between October, 2007 and June, 2008, and the refund has been claimed on 27-10-2008, time-bar will arise for exports which have taken place during the period 1-10-2007 to 26-10-2007. This aspect will need to be re-considered by the original authority - appeal allowed by way of refund.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim time-barred under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T.
Applicability of Notification No. 17/2009-S.T. for refund claims.
Benefit of Board clarification on the applicability of new Notification.
Interpretation of the relaxation provided by the Board.
CESTAT decision in Knitex Textiles Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai on similar issue.
Reconsideration of refund claim for exports done between specific periods.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting a refund claim under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T. The claim was filed for service tax paid on services related to goods export between October 2007 to March 2008. The original authority rejected the claim as time-barred, filed after 60 days limit. The appellant argued that Notification No. 17/2009-S.T. replaced the previous one, allowing claims within one year from the date of export, contrary to the earlier 60-day requirement.

The Board clarified that the new Notification applies even to prior exports. The Tribunal viewed the clarification as a benefit to taxpayers, relaxing conditions under Notification No. 17/2009-S.T. The appellant's claim under the earlier Notification should benefit from the relaxation, allowing refunds within one year from export. Citing a CESTAT decision supporting this interpretation, the Tribunal noted the need to reconsider claims for exports between specific periods due to the time-bar issue.

Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the previous order, remanding the matter for the Original Authority to review the refund claim in light of the Board's clarification and the relaxation provided, ensuring consideration for exports within the correct time frame. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.