2014 (6) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AR JUDGEMENT Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa: Briefly stated, the appellants are registered with the Service Tax Department for providing various taxable services. The appellants entered agreements between 1986 to 1992 and sub-licensed its premises to different parties after accepting interest free security deposits totally amounting to Rs. 1680.45 lakhs for a period of nine years and eleven months. Thi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... notional interest (as held by the Tribunal in the matter reported in 2006 2 (STR) 237 (Tri.-Kolkatta), upheld by Supreme Court reported in 2006 4 (STR) J 152 (SC) they filed refund claim of Service Tax so deposited by them. The said refund claim stands denied by the lower authorities vide his impugned order on the point of limitation. 5. The appellant submit that they had filed refund applicatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in those cases where it is not required to be deposited. As such, limitation would not apply in any case of refund, which proposition would be against the law. Further, it is well settled that the Revenue authorities, including the Tribunal, being creature of statue are required to work within the four corners of the law and cannot go beyond it. As such the refund, if otherwise admissible, has to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X