2018 (2) TMI 830 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - rejected on the ground that the same were filed beyond the prescribed time limit of 60 days provided under the N/N. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 - Held that - Since the present refund application is in relation to availment of the exemption, and is no way, connected with the erroneous payment of service tax, the time limit provided under Section 11B of the Act is not applicable and the time frame prescribed in the Notification dated 6.10.2007 is strictly applicable for consideration of the refund application - Since the Notification dated 6.10.2007 clearly provides that refund application should be filed on a quarterly basis, within 60 days from the end of the relevant quarter, such time limit provided in the notification has to be strictly adhered to for consideration of the refund application. Tribunal in the case of K.S. Oils 2017 (3) TMI 422 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has held that the time limit provided under N/N. 41/2007 dated 6.10.2007 is strictly applicable for consideration of refund of service tax - the refund claims filed in respect of quarter ending October to Dec. 2007 and Jan. to March 2008 are barred by limitation of time and thus, there is no infirmity in impugned order, in rejecting the refund claims filed by the appellant. With regard to the refund claim filed for the quarter ending April 2008 to June 2008, in terms of the notification dated 18.11.2008, the same is not barred by limitation of time, having been filed within six months from the relevant date. However, since this limitation aspect has not been dealt with by the authorities below, we are of the view that the matter should go back to the original authority for proper verification of the refund applications to ascertain, whether such applications were filed within the prescribed time limit prescribed under Notification No.32/2008-ST dated 18.11.2008. Appeal rejected in part and part matter on remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Refund application time limit under Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007.
- Applicability of one-year time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for refund claims.
- Interpretation of the exemption notification and time limits for filing refund claims.
- Adherence to the time limits as prescribed in the notification for consideration of refund applications.

Analysis:
1. The appeals challenged the rejection of refund applications by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to late filing beyond the 60-day time limit under Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007. The appellant argued that the one-year time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 should apply, allowing the refund application filed within one year to be considered. However, the Revenue contended that the specific time limit in the notification must be strictly followed for refund consideration, citing the case of CCE Indore Vs. K.S. Oils Ltd. (2017 (52) STR 261 (Tri.-Del.)) to support their stance.

2. The Tribunal examined the case records and found that the refund claims for various quarters were filed beyond the stipulated time frame as per the Notification dated 6.10.2007. It was clarified that the time limit under Section 11B does not apply in cases of exemption monitored through refund applications, as in this scenario. Referring to the case law, the Tribunal emphasized that conditions in exemption notifications, such as the time limit for filing claims, must be strictly adhered to without room for extension, as seen in various judgments cited.

3. The Tribunal ruled that the refund claims for certain quarters were time-barred based on the notification's provisions. However, for the quarter ending April 2008 to June 2008, the refund claim was not time-barred as per the notification dated 18.11.2008. The matter regarding this specific quarter was remanded to the original authority for verification of timely filing and assessment of the claim on its merits, ensuring compliance with the prescribed time limit under Notification No.32/2008-ST dated 18.11.2008.

4. Ultimately, the appeals were disposed of with the decision to send back the matter related to the refund application for the quarter April to June 2008 to the original authority for a fresh decision in accordance with the Tribunal's observations. The judgment highlighted the importance of strict adherence to time limits specified in exemption notifications for claiming refunds, as established by legal precedents and the specific provisions of the notifications in question.