Case Law Details
Raheja Regency Cooperative Housing Society ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that limitation prescribed under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 not applicable to refund claims for Service Tax paid under mistake of law.
Facts-
The Appellant is providing the services under the category of Club or Association Services and is a Society Registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Housing Society Act, 1960. They have filed two refund claims on 2.12.2016, one for Rs.7,68,950/- for the period 2014-15 and another for Rs.9,22,795/- for the period 2015-16 on the ground that they have paid service tax under protest as they are Co-operative Society not engaged in any activity of profit and as per the principle of mutuality, services provided by them to their members would not be liable to Service tax under the Club or Association Service. Since the department was of the view that the grounds of refund claims are not sustainable and liable for rejection therefore a show cause notice dated 4.1.2017 was issued to the Appellant to clarify as to why the refund claim should not be rejected on merits as well as on the ground of limitation in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to service tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.
The Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original dated 28.2.2017 rejected the refund claims on the ground of limitation u/s. 11B ibid as made applicable to Service Tax matters and also on merits by applying the provisions of Section 66B & 66D of Finance Act, 1994. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the appellants.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
