Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Service Tax

Rejection of Service Tax Refund Under Section 142(8) of CGST Act Not Justified: CESTAT Chennai

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2024 taxguru.in 5655
Case Name
Bosch Automotive Electronics India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


Bosch Automotive Electronics India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)

CESTAT Chennai held that denial of refund claim related to cenvat credit of service tax under RCM by invoking provisions of Section 142(8) of the CGST Act is cannot be justified. Accordingly, order rejected refund claim set aside.

Facts- The Appellant pursuant to an audit conducted by the Department in November 2017, paid Service Tax along with applicable interest of Rs. 39,18,672/- on 08.12.2017, under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) on the import of services like Royalty, Technical/Professional fees for the period from April 2015 to June 2017. The Appellants claim for input service credit was objected by the Department as the CGST Act, 2017 came into effect from 01.07.2017. As the CENVAT credit was denied, the Appellant, subsequently have filed a refund claim u/s. 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 r.w.s. 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on 19.01.2018, claiming that the amount of service tax so paid after introduction of the GST laws was eligible as CENVAT credit under the Credit Rules.

But the Department rejected the refund claim. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.

Conclusion- Held that the Impugned order has attempted to reject refund by invoking provisions of Section 142(8) of the CGST Act. A standalone perusal of the Impugned Order reveals that there is no ground whatsoever raised under the existing law, under which the refund has been denied. Invocation of Section 142(8) in the present case, for the purpose of denying refund is not warranted as none of the circumstances under Section 142(8) are attracted in the instant case. Section 142(8) invocation is warranted in a situation where amounts become recoverable from an assessee in pursuance of an assessment or adjudication proceedings initiated before, on or after the appointed date. The payment of service tax in the instant case is not pursuant to the circumstances set out in Section 142(8) but merely pursuant to audit undertaken of the accounts / records of the appellant.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.