9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 707X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y service tax on their activity or not on export of services for the prior period. The appellant for abundant quotation paid service tax during the impugned period. Later on, the dispute was settled in favour of the appellant holding that they are not liable to pay service tax for the earlier period on 16.03.2018 and the appellant has filed refund claim within two months of the decision of this Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 5 readwith Section 11B of the Act have been rejected as time barred. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a service provider and an exporter of the services. A dispute was going on between the appellant and the revenue whether they are liable to pay service tax on the services which have been exported as intermediary or not for the period prior to 01.04.2014. As the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time limit prescribed under Section 11B is not applicable to the facts of this case and they are entitled for refund claim. He also relied on the various judgements of the Hon ble High Courts. 4. In alternate, he submits that as the issue between the appellant and revenue has been settled vide judgement dated 16.03.2018 passed by this Tribunal, therefore, the relevant date of filing the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the parties and considered the submissions. 7. The facts of the case are not in dispute that a dispute between the appellant and the revenue was going on whether they were liable to pay service tax on their activity or not on export of services for the prior period. The appellant for abundant quotation paid service tax during the impugned period. Later on, the dispute was settled in favour of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
