TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T:- It is not in dispute that all the cash refund claims of accumulated credit have been filed during July and August, 2017 i.e. after 01/07/2017. Also, it is not in dispute that the appellant had transitioned from the old CENVAT credit into input tax credit w.e.f. 01/07/2017 and shown the closing balance of CENVAT credit as on 30/06/2017 being the opening balance of Input Tax Credit under IGST as on 01/07/2017. A plain reading of the provision of of Section 142(3), makes it clear that under the second proviso, it is specifically stipulated that no refunds will be allowed of any amount of cenvat credit where the balance of the said amount as on the appointed day i.e. 01/07/2017 has been carried forward under the CGST Act, 2017. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Rules, 2004. There is no reason to interfere with the order of the authorities below - Appeal of assessee dismissed. - Service Tax appeal No. 20236 of 2020 Service Tax appeals No. 20466, 20467 of 2021 Service Tax Appeal No. 20467 of 20201 - - - Dated:- 28-3-2023 - HON'BLE Dr. D. M. MISRA , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) Shri T. L. James , Consultant for the appellant Smt. D. S. Sangeetha , Addl. Commissioner ( AR ) for the respondent ORDER Per : DR. D. M. MISRA These three appeals are filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.133-135/2020 dt. 25/02/2020 passed by Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Bengaluru. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing taxable service u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch 2017, on export of goods in accordance with Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004. It is the contention that as on 30/06/2017, on being asked by the Department, the CENVAT credit lying in balance have been transitioned to the CGST regime by taking input tax credit in the relevant credit ledger w.e.f. 01/07/2017. He has submitted that later, they filed refund claims of the cenvat credit being accumulated in the respective quarter on export of the goods, in accordance with Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004 on 05/07/2017, 10/07/2017 and 29/08/2017. He has submitted that even though, at the time of filing the refund claims, the total credit of Rs.37,42,620/- was not debited from their input tax credit ledger but the same was later shown as debited in their December ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Act, 2017. He submits that the judgments cited by the learned consultant for the appellant are not applicable to the facts of the present case as in none of the cases, the assessee after transitioned from old cenvat credit regime to input tax credit under TGST w.e.f. 01/07/2017, requested cash refund of the CENVAT credit accumulated due to export for the period prior to 01/07/2017. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. Appellant sought to file written submission on conclusion of the hearing. However, till date, no written submission has been filed. 6. The short issue involved in the present appeals for determination is: in the facts of the case, whether the appellants are entitled to cash refund of accumulated cenvat credit p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected, the amount so rejected shall lapse: Provided further 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. A plain reading of the said provision makes it clear that under the second proviso, it is specifically stipulated that no refunds will be allowed of any amount of cenvat credit where the balance of the said amount as on the appointed day i.e. 01/07/2017 has been carried forward under the CGST Act, 2017. In the present case, the learned consultant for the appellant fairly accepted that the entire amount of cenvat credit laying in balance as on 30/06/2017 have been transitioned to CGST regime and shown as input tax cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Also, in Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery Pvt. Ltd. s case, the appellant in that case was unable to transition the unutilised accumulated credit to the CGST regime. At the cost of repetition, it can be stated that in none of the case laws cited, it was considered and held that after transition from the existing cenvat regime to CGST regime, the cash refund of the accumulated credit as was prior to 01/07/2017 could be considered for refund under Notification No.27/2012 read with Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In the circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the order of the authorities below. Accordingly, the same are upheld and the appeals being devoid of merit are rejected. ( Order pronounced on ) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
