9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of service by the service provider who has discharged the service tax liability, the appellant in the capacity of recipient of service, in our opinion, has no locus standi to file the application claiming refund on a different classification of service that on what was paid by the service provider - as per the mandates of Section 11B, any amount claimed as refund, has to pass the test provided therein and since condition of limitation is one of the ground mentioned therein, the same cannot be overlooked for consideration of the refund application - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/76/2011-ST[DB] - ST/A/52296/2017-CU[DB] - Dated:- 18-1-2017 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Techn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund of service tax paid by the service provider during the period May 2005 to May 2007. 2. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant in the capacity of receiver of service is entitled to claim the refund of service tax paid to the service provider, which is ultimately deposited into the Central Government account. She further submits, that since the activities undertaken by the service provider is outside the scope and purview of any taxable service, the amount paid by the appellant cannot be retained by the department as Government Revenue. Thus, she submits that since the amount paid by the service provider is a mere payment and cannot be construed as service tax, the time limit provided in Section 11B o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such service having been not disputed by the service provider, it cannot be said that the amount paid by the service provider cannot be termed as service tax and the provisions of Section 11B ibid will not be applicable for claiming such refund. Even otherwise, as per the mandates of Section 11B, any amount claimed as refund, has to pass the test provided therein and since condition of limitation is one of the ground mentioned therein, the same cannot be overlooked for consideration of the refund application. 6. Thus, we are of the view that the refund application filed by the appellant does not survive both on the ground of merits as well as limitation. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. (Dictated and pronounc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
