9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Deepak Roshan, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate ORDER Per D.N. Patel, J 1. This writ petition has been preferred for getting back the amount of Rs. 2,52,762/- (Rupees two lakhs fifty two thousand seven hundred and sixty two only), which was deposited by this petitioner despite there is no liability to make payment of any type of tax under any law much less as a service tax. Thus, the afores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esaid amount was deposited by this petitioner with the respondents under the mistake of fact and law both and hence, this petitioner is seeking return of his money. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to be read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, now refund claim is time barred and hence, this petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y this petitioner from the persons to whom the services were provided by this petitioner in the relevant years. 7. Looking to the paragraph no.06 of the affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Jharkhand, which reads as under :- "6. That in reply to para 11 of the writ application it is stated and submitted that since the petitioner is well aware of the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner is never under the Central Excise Tax nor under the service tax when there is no liability to make the payment of the amount and under the mistake of facts or under mistake of law or under both if any amount is deposited by the assessee, the same cannot be retained by the Union of India under the one or other pretext when a service provider is not liable to make payment of the service tax and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
