Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Krishna Construction Co. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax (CESTAT Allahabad)
Appeal Number : Service Tax Appeal No. 70697 of 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 17/08/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Krishna Construction Co. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax (CESTAT Allahabad)

In the instance case service tax was liable to be paid at the relevant time and it is only subsequently that by a retrospective amendment, exemption was granted with a specific condition that refund could be claimed by filing it within six months from the date of enactment of the Finance Bill 2016. The refund claim had, therefore, to be filed within six month from 14.05.2016, but it was filed beyond the said period.

The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that since the limitation period of one year contemplated under section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944 provides for filing of the claim within one year from the date of payment of tax, the refund claim filed by the appellant should be treated to have been filed within time as it was filed within one year cannot also be accepted for the reason that section 102 (1) of the Finance Act itself provides for a limitation period of six months for filing a refund claim.

Once the refund claim is held to be barred by time, the question of unjust enrichment would not arise.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT ALLAHABAD ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031