TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him shall be paid in cash. The issue before this Tribunal is to scrutinise as to if only existing law would govern the refund or else the procedure available under existing law for ultimate redressal /disposal of the refund application would extend to the Appellate stage available in the existing law too. The Circular No. 132/2/2020-GST dated 18.03.2020 by CBEC clarified that the Central Goods and Service Tax (ninth removal of difficulties) order 2019 dated 03.12.2019 provides that within 3 months of the President of GST Tribunal entering office, appeals can be filed when no such Tribunal is firmed and in case of existence of such GST Tribunal it is to be filed within 3 months of communication of the order. Be that as it may, the concer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I), Pune vide above referred order is assailed in this appeal. 2. Factual backdrop of the case, in brief, is that Appellant is undisputedly covered under Rule 7 of Point of Taxation Rules, 2011, i.e. meant for associated enterprises and it was required to pay service tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism in terms of the provisions of Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 as receiver of service from the date of debit in the books of account as receiver of service or from the date of making payment, whichever is earlier. Appellant-manufacturer made the final booking in terms of provision of Service Tax during the finalisation of its balance sheet on 30.11.2017 and 31.12.2017 for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise [2021-TIOL-696-CESTAT-MAD], M/s Circor Flow Technologies India Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of GST and Central Excise Coimbatore 641018-Service Tax Appeal No. 40597 of 2020, M/s Jagannath Polymers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of CGST, Jaipur-1 [2022-TIOL-66 CESTAT-DEL], Flexi Caps And Polymers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Indore- [2021-TIOL-611-CESTAT-DEL], Rawalwasia Ispat Udyog Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Panchkula- [2019 (26) G.S.T.L. 196 (Tri. Chan.)] submitted that the claim filed by the Appellant merits consideration and Appellant was eligible to avail credit of Service Tax paid as input services were used for manufacturing activity. Since carrying forward of CENVAT credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue and the case record. It is noteworthy to mention here that Section 142(3) clearly stipulated that refund of any amount of CENVAT credit, duty etc. paid under the existing law (means the law prevailing then i.e. Central Excise Act) shall be dealt in accordance with the provisions of existing law and any amount eventually accruing to him shall be paid in cash. The issue before this Tribunal is to scrutinise as to if only existing law would govern the refund or else the procedure available under existing law for ultimate redressal /disposal of the refund application would extend to the Appellate stage available in the existing law too. The decisions cited by the learned Counsel for the appellant referred above clearly indicates that Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appointed day under the existing law shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of existing law and any amount of credit found to be admissible to the claimant shall be refunded to him in cash, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the provisions of existing law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and the amount rejected, if any, shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act: Provided that no refund shall be allowed of any amount of CENVAT credit where the balance of the said amount as on the appointed day has been carried forward under this Act. (Underlined to emphasis) Now the question comes, if such a provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner (Appeals) solely on the ground that GST was payable and no evidence of payment of GST was available is also not tenable and is erroneous to the extent that under GST Act recovery provisions are also available which can be resorted to by the competent authority instead of making a pre-condition of payment of GST to facilitate the refund process that was instituted under the erstwhile Central Excise Act in borrowing force from the new GST Act itself. That apart, the forwarding memo of the Order-in-Original reveals that appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 shall be maintainable and Order-in-Appeal forwarding memo also reveals that appeal lies to CESTAT under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 / Section 86(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
