9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayment on the whole supply (including advance as above) after 01.07.2017. Having paid the tax twice under two different tax regimes, they sought refund of payment which was made on advance receipt by them prior to 30.06.2017 under Finance Act, 1994. The department has disputed and rejected the refund on the ground that the same was correctly paid under the provisions of Finance Act, 1994. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant seeks to rely on the decision of M/s Thirumal Facade Solutions vs Commissioner GST and Central Excise Chennai as reported in 2023 (2) TMI 1252 CESTAT-Chennai in which the issue was decided in similar circumstances in favour of assessee by way of remand by making suitable observation even on merits. 2. The Learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t called for in this difficult period. The Appellant has made available documents that would facilitate the verification of double taxation as claimed. Since the department has asked the Appellant to reverse the prepaid service tax claimed as per GST TRAN - 1, and if the facts on verification are found in order then the amount has to be refunded in cash to the Appellant. The ends of justice would be met if Revenue verifies the facts of the activity being taxed twice and decides on the refund application accordingly." Therefore after considering the merits of the matter and concluding that the double taxation was avoidable even under the two tax regimes the matter was remitted by the Learned Single Member Bench, in that case, due to the na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansition provisions and there were several clauses available which allowed taxes unpaid to be recovered by the department as also refunds not paid to be allowed at a later stage and even input credit to be availed by the party. 4. Due to the special features available in GST Regime, the Learned Member of Single Member Bench of Chennai (in cited decision) has correctly held that there cannot be a double taxation. It is for department to choose whether it would like to refund tax or give credit under GST regume. Since in this case tax on the same transaction has been suffered twice, therefore, as per the provision of Finance Act, 1994 including provisions of refund as have been borrowed from Central Excise Act, 1944, the refund is permissibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
