9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made in June, 2018, which is perhaps within the period of one year but, however, by that time it is an undisputed fact that the GST regime had taken over by which filing of ST-3 Return was done-away. There is also no denial by the Revenue as to the claim of the appellant that subsequent to the filing of TRAN-1 Return, the refund amount was debited in its GSTR-3B/Electronic Credit Ledger. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent ORDER By this appeal, the assessee-appellant is challenging the denial of refund of un-utilized input Cenvat Credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR for short). The appellant, a provider of Information Technology Services to its foreign clients, filed a refund claim of service tax paid on input services, of an amount of ₹ 8,07,955/- for the period A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has filed the present appeal before this forum. 2. Heard Shri A.S. Hariharakumar, Learned Consultant, for the assessee-appellant and Shri M. Jagan Babu, Learned Departmental Representative, for the Revenue, I have gone through the documents placed on record and also the decisions relied on by the appellant. The availability of input credit as regards the services rendered at un-registered premi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant that subsequent to the filing of TRAN-1 Return, the refund amount was debited in its GSTR-3B/Electronic Credit Ledger. In this regard, I find that the decisions relied upon by the Learned Consultant on the following cases namely:- 1. Inductoterm Group Pune (P) Ltd., Vs. C.S.T. (Order Nos. A/88468-88971/2017/SMB dated 3.7.2017) 2. Sandoz (P) Ltd., Vs. C.C.E (Order Nos. A/31180-3019/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
