2026-VIL-1733-CESTAT-CHE-ST
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1733-CESTAT-CHE-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax – Limitation for refund of accumulated CENVAT credit on export of services under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Appellant, engaged in providing Business Auxiliary Service and Business Support Service, filed a refund claim for a quarter under Rule 5 read with Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT), part of which was rejected as time-barred by reckoning the relevant date as the date of the export invoice - Whether the refund claim of accumulated CENVAT credit attributable to export of services is partly barred by limitation - HELD - The issue of limitation is governed by Rule 5 read with Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT). The Madras High Court has held that the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to refund claims under Rule 5. However, the relevant date in the case of export of services requires separate consideration, as Section 11B does not specifically prescribe a relevant date for such exports. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal held that the limitation of one year is to be reckoned from the last day of the quarter in which the foreign exchange is received. The Larger Bench did not dispense with the application of Section 11B but determined the relevant date for export of services in the context of Rule 5 and the applicable notification. The Respondent's contention that limitation must invariably be reckoned from the date of the export invoice cannot be accepted. The plea that the subsequent amending Notification is prospective does not, by itself, displace the principle laid down by the Larger Bench regarding determination of the relevant date - The issue is decided in favour of the Appellant and the impugned order is set aside to that extent - Service Tax – Refund of CENVAT credit attributable to invoices of unregistered premises - Respondent rejected part of the refund claim on the ground that the invoices pertained to unregistered premises, contending that registration is a mandatory condition under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) - Whether the refund can be denied solely on the ground that the invoices pertain to unregistered premises - HELD - The issue is covered by the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, which held that Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 does not prescribe registration of the premises as a prerequisite for claiming refund of unutilised CENVAT credit attributable to exported services. The requirement concerning the jurisdiction of the authority to which the refund application is to be made cannot be construed as a prohibition against refund merely because the premises from which the services were exported were unregistered. The Tribunal decision relied upon by the Respondent cannot prevail over the binding decision of the jurisdictional High Court - The rejection of refund merely on the ground of non-registration of the premises is set aside, the Appellant is eligible for consequential relief as per law, and the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST & Customs updates: Sep'26
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?