𝗖𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗶 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿: 𝗦𝘂𝗯𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲 𝗦𝘂𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 📢 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗱: "Time limits prescribed in subordinate legislation cannot override Section 11B of the parent statute. Appeal allowed."

🔍 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀: 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗻𝘁: Ms. Core Minerals 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲: Refund claim denial based on exceeding the 60-day limit in Notification No. 41/2007 is invalid as substantive provisions of Section 11B override subordinate legislation. Tribunal upheld appellant's claim.

⚖️ 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: The Tribunal upheld that Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, being a substantive provision, overrides subordinate legislation. Time limits under Section 11B prevail, and the 60-day limit in Notification No. 41/2007 cannot contradict the parent statute. Refund denial based on the notification’s timeline was deemed invalid.

📜 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝗧𝗶𝘁𝗹𝗲: Ms. Core Minerals vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗲: 22 February 2023 🚩 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Refund claims should adhere to Section 11B's limitation period, and stricter timelines in subordinate legislation cannot be enforced if they contradict the parent statute.