Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1592 - CESTAT MUMBAIRefund of accumulated credit - refund sought on the ground that the credit stands not utilised by the appellant for export of services - denial of refund on the ground that the input services has no nexus with the output services or the credit stands availed on the basis of the irrelevant invoices etc. - HELD THAT:- It is seen that no objection was raised by the revenue at the time of availing of credit. Rule 5 allows refund of accumulated credit and at the time of grant of refund, the Revenue is not permitted to examine the availability of the CENVAT credit. Such an exercise was required to be adopted by the Revenue at the time of availment of credit, by way of initiation of separate proceedings. Having not done that, it is not permissible to raise the objection at the time of grant of refund in terms of the said rule - The reliance by the Learned Advocate to the Circular no. 120/01/2010-ST dated 19.01.2010 clarifying the issue that by observing that there cannot be different yardstick for establishing nexus for taking of credit and for refund of credit, is appropriate. The issue stands decided by the many decisions of the Tribunal. One such reference can be made to the Tribunal decision in the case of M/S BARCLAYS GLOBAL SERVICE CENTRE PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX (VICE-VERSA) [2019 (6) TMI 902 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD]. It stands held in the said decision that as no objection was raised by the Revenue at the time of availing the credit, such objection cannot be raised at the time of deciding the refund claim in terms of provision of Rule 5. There are no merits in the stand of the Revenue - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|