Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2024 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (10) TMI 324 - AT - Service Tax


Issues:
Denial of cash refund of accumulated cenvat credit post introduction of GST; Interpretation of section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 for refund eligibility.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with the denial of a cash refund of Rs. 30,38,426/- as accumulated cenvat credit paid post the introduction of GST. The Appellant sought a refund of the cenvat credit in cash under section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, after paying certain Service Taxes on Reverse Charge Mechanism for the period from April 2016 to June 2017. The Respondent issued a show cause notice proposing rejection of the refund under section 142(8)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017, leading to an adjudication process where the Appellant's claim was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals).

The Appellant argued that previous judgments by the Tribunal had held that payment of service tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism after the implementation of the CGST Act is refundable by cash under section 142(3) of the Act. The Appellant relied on various precedents to support their claim for a cash refund. On the contrary, the Authorised Representative for the respondent department cited judgments from the Jharkhand High Court and Madras High Court, stating that in the absence of a specific statutory provision, such a refund is not admissible.

The Tribunal analyzed the case record and previous judgments. It noted that there was no express contrary finding in the judgments cited by the respondent's representative. The Tribunal emphasized that section 142(6) of the CGST Act mandated the disposal of cenvat credit claims in accordance with the provisions of the pre-existing law, allowing for cash refunds. The Tribunal also highlighted the non-obstante clause in section 142(3) of the CGST Act, which permitted cash refunds for cenvat credit even in the absence of specific provisions in the pre-existing law.

Based on the analysis, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Respondent Department was directed to pay the Appellant Rs. 30,38,426/- with applicable interest in cash within two months from the date of the order. The judgment clarified the interpretation of section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, regarding the eligibility of cash refunds for accumulated cenvat credit post-GST implementation.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates