Cerner Healthcare Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore)
The adjudicating authority rejected the claim as time barred since said documents were submitted beyond one year.
The appellant is an SEZ unit engaged in export of services. It filed a refund claim for input services received by it for authorised operations in terms of Notification no.9/2009-ST. The refund claim was partially allowed. It filed appeal before commissioner (appeals). The appellate authority remanded the matter back with direction to produce certain documents in support of the claim. On remand, the adjudicating authority rejected the claim as time barred since said documents were submitted beyond one year. On appeal, this time, Commissioner (appeals) upheld such order. Hence, appeal.
Hon’ble CESTAT, Bengaluru set aside the orders and allowed the appeals. It held: (i) the adjucating authority did not seek any documents post remand from commissioner (appeals) and hence, claim could not be said to be time barred; (ii) the original claim was filed in time and it was, in fact, partially allowed and hence, submission of documents cannot be said to be time barred; (iii) the claim was not hit by section 11B(EC) of the Central Excise Act as held in several decisions of Tribunal; (iv) the appellant had submitted all documents directed by the appellate authority and hence; claim is allowable on merits; barring a few services which remain unchallenged by the appellant.
