9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 923 - AT - Service TaxRefund of CENVAT credit - Form-A does not match with the amount of CENVAT credit availed in the ST-3 returns for the relevant period - failure to debit the refund claim from its CENVAT credit account at the time of filing of refund claims as required under condition 2(h) of the Notification dated 18.06.2012 - reversal of credit in GSTR-3B filed for the month of December 2017 and March 2018 - HELD THAT - The period in dispute in this appeal is from July 2016 to June 2017. The appointed date under the 2017 Act is 01.07.2017. Immediately after filing of the last ST-3 return, the appellant claimed CENVAT credit lying in its books of account on 30.06.2017 through Trans-1 filed on 11.08.2017 in the Delhi GST registration and, thereafter, transferred the CENVAT credit to its Bangalore Unit in terms of the proviso to section 140(8) of the 2017 Act for the reason that Bangalore Unit had the same PAN and was included in the centralized registration of the appellant in the Service Tax Regime. The contention of the department is that the CENVAT credit has been wrongly reversed by the Bangalore Unit as it is a distinct person in the GST regime and the same was required to be reversed by the Delhi unit - This view taken by the department ignores the factual position that CENVAT credit pertains to pre-GST regime when the Bangalore Unit was included in the centralized registration of the Delhi unit. Thus, as the Bangalore Unit was part of centralized registration in the service tax regime, the appellant correctly transferred the CENVAT credit as CGST input to its Bangalore Unit in terms of section 140(8) of the 2017 Act. The refund claim has also been rejected for the reason that the total CENVAT credit claimed as refund in Form-A does not match with the CENVAT credit availed in the ST-3 return filed for all the four quarters covering the period in dispute from July 2016 to June 2017 - This mismatch has occurred on account of the fact that Swachh Bharat Cess paid by the appellant at the time of filing of return was not reported in the ST-3 returns, since there was no column for mentioning it in the ST-3 returns. The appellant has correctly also filed a refund claim for Swachh Bharat Cess amounting to Rs. 56,42,239/- in terms of Notification No. 3/2016 dated 03.02.2016. The appellant is, therefore, also entitled to claim refund of Rs. 56,42,239/-. It is not possible to sustain the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is, accordingly, set aside. The appellant would be entitled to refund of the amount of CENVAT credit with interest at the prescribed rate - Appeal allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Compliance with condition 2(h) of the Notification dated 18.06.2012. 2. Mismatch between CENVAT credit claimed as refund and availed in ST-3 returns. 3. Eligibility for refund of Swachh Bharat Cess. Summary: Issue 1: Compliance with condition 2(h) of the Notification dated 18.06.2012 The appellant, M/s. Times Content Limited, contended that they fulfilled condition 2(h) of the Notification dated 18.06.2012, which requires debiting the refund amount from the CENVAT credit account at the time of making the claim. The appellant claimed the CENVAT credit through Tran-1 in the Delhi GST registration and transferred it to the Bangalore Unit, which reversed the accumulated CENVAT credit in its GST returns. The Tribunal observed that practical difficulties arose due to the transition from the Service Tax regime to the GST regime, and as the Bangalore Unit was part of centralized registration in the service tax regime, the transfer and reversal were correctly done in terms of section 140(8) of the 2017 Act. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant fulfilled condition 2(h) of the Notification dated 18.06.2012, referencing decisions in MSYS Tech India Private Limited and Global Analytics India Pvt. Ltd. Issue 2: Mismatch between CENVAT credit claimed as refund and availed in ST-3 returnsThe refund was also denied due to a mismatch between the CENVAT credit claimed as refund in Form-A and the amount availed in the ST-3 returns. The Tribunal noted that this mismatch occurred because the Swachh Bharat Cess paid was not reported in the ST-3 returns due to the absence of a relevant column. The Tribunal found that the appellant correctly filed the refund claim for the Swachh Bharat Cess amount and was entitled to the refund. Issue 3: Eligibility for refund of Swachh Bharat CessThe appellant claimed a refund of Rs. 56,42,239/- for Swachh Bharat Cess in terms of Notification No. 3/2016 dated 03.02.2016. The Tribunal upheld this claim, noting that the appellant correctly filed the refund claim. Conclusion:The Tribunal set aside the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), allowing the appellant's refund claim with interest at the prescribed rate. The appeal was allowed.
|
