Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2010-11/1034

Relevant date of filing Refund claim
Case: Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi v/s M/s HMA Udyog Pvt Ltd
 
Citation: 2010 (20) STR 827 (Tri–Del) 

Issue:- What will be the date of filing of the refund claim if first it is submitted incomplete and subsequently the completed documents are submitted? 

Brief Facts:- During the period from 16 August 2002 to March'03 respondent-assessee paid service tax by treating their activity as Advertising Agency Service. Subsequently, on realizing that their activity was not covered by the definition of advertising agency service, they filed a refund claim on 29.8.03 alongwith certain documents. Since all the relevant documents were not submitted and certain information had not been given, respondents were asked to furnish the required documents and information. Accordingly, revised refund claim was filed on 17.03.04. 

The Adjudicating Authority rejected the entire refund claim as being time barred under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to service tax by virtue of Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. The assessee filed an appeal to the Commissioner (A). The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order on the ground that since the tax had been collected without authority of law, the limitation period under Section 11B would not apply as the refund claim would not be governed by the Section 11B. 

Against this order, appeal has been filed by Revenue before the Tribunal. Their appeal specifically mentioned that the refund claim of service tax of Rs.82, 544/- deposited by TR.6 challan dt.16.8.02 is time barred. 

Appellant’s Contention:- Revenue pleaded that since the claim had been filed under provisions of Section 11B read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, it would be governed by the limitation period prescribed under this Section. The Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly held that this is a case when the tax was paid without authority of law and limitation period would not apply. Reliance was placed on judgment in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs Union of India [1997 (89) ELT 247 (SC)] wherein it was held that once a refund claim is filed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, it would be governed by the provisions of that section.
 
Respondent’s Contention:- Respondent concedes that the limitation period prescribed under Section 11B would be applicable to this refund claim but he emphasized that since the refund claim had been filed on 29.8.03, only a part of the claim, in particular an amount of Rs.82,544/- paid on 16.8.02, would be hit by limitation and the rest of the claim would be within time. It was submitted that even the Revenue's appeal is against the Commissioner(Appeals)'s order allowing refund of service tax of Rs.82,544/- paid on 16.8.02, as it is mentioned that it only the refund claim of the amount of Rs.82,544/- paid on 16.8.02 which is time barred and as such Revenue's appeal does not challenge the entire refund claim and that in view of this, the Commissioner(Appeals)'s order is incorrect only to the extent of allowing the refund claim of Rs.82,544/-.
 
Reasoning of the Judgment:- The Tribunal found that respondent had paid the service tax amounting to Rs.82,544/- for the month of July'02 on 16.8.02 and the service tax for the months from Aug'02 to June'03 had been paid during the period from 13.9.02 to 24.7.03. The total tax paid for period from July'02 to June'03 was Rs.12, 19, 287/- out of which an amount of Rs.82, 544/- as service tax for July'02 had been paid on 16.8.02. The respondent had paid the service tax under the impression that their activity is covered by the definition of "Advertising Agency Service". However, subsequently on realizing that their activity is not covered by the definition of Advertising Agency Service, they filed the refund claim on 29.8.03.
 
The Tribunal found that though on defects and deficiencies being pointed out by the Department, the respondent had submitted the revised refund claim on 17.03.04, it is 29.8.03 which has to be treated as the date for filing the claim. Since both sides agreed that the refund would be governed by the limitation period prescribed under Section 11B, it is only the refund claim of Rs.82,544/- of the service tax for the month of July'02 paid on 16.8.02, which would be hit by time bar and the remaining claim would be within time.
 
In view of the above, it was held that the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order is incorrect only to the extent it has allowed the refund claim of Rs.82, 544/- of service tax paid on 16.8.02. The Commissioner (Appeals)'s order stands modified.
 
Decision:- Revenue's appeal partly allowed.
 
Comments:- This is very good decision. Department normally says that the refund is to be reckoned from the date when all the documents are filed. They return the refund rather than issuing show cause notice. Even if the show cause notice is issued and the incomplete documents are filed then they say that the refund is to be reckoned from the date of filing of documents. Hence these are time barred. But this decision has clearly laid down that the it is to be reckoned from the date when refund is originally filed and not from the date when insufficient document/information is filed subsequently. 
 

************
 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com