9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading of clause (e) and (f) contained in the Notification, it transpires that the statutory requirement of time limit for filing the refund application is contained in clause (e), which has to be strictly adhered to by the assessee for the purpose of claiming refund - Since Clause (f) is procedural in nature and the appellant in this case has compiled with the statutory Provisions of filing the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... films. In terms of Notification No. 12/2013- ST dated 01.07.2013, the appellant had filed the application claiming refund of Service Tax of ₹ 82,60, 860 paid on various input services used/utilized in the authorized operation of the SEZ unit. Out of the said refund claimed amount, the original authority has rejected the refund amount of ₹ 54,40,113/-, which comprised of the refund am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the end of the month, in which actual payment of Service Tax was made by the developer of the SEZ unit to the registered service provider. The clause (f) in Paragraph III also provides that the SEZ unit of the developer shall submit only one refund application under the notification for every quarter. It is an admitted fact on record that within one year from the date of actual payment of Servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is procedural in nature and the appellant in this case has compiled with the statutory Provisions of filing the refund application within one year from the date of payment of Service Tax to the service provider, in my opinion, rejection of refund claim of ₹ 4,64,114/- by the authorities below is not in conformity with the conditions laid down in Notification dated 01.07.2013. 6. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
