Transitional GST refund must be paid in cash, and delay from early regime confusion may be condoned.

Delay in filing the appeal was condoned because it arose during the GST period, when confusion and lack of clarity persisted and there was no indication of deliberate inaction or wilful negligence. The transitional refund claim was required to be paid in cash, not credited to the Cenvat account, because claims pending on the appointed day were to be dealt with under the existing law and the amount ultimately due had to be disbursed in cash. The order crediting the refund to the Cenvat account was corrected as a mistake apparent from the record, and the assessee was entitled to cash refund with consequential interest.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority should be condoned; (ii) whether the refund of duty payable under the transitional regime was required to be granted in cash instead of being credited to the Cenvat account.

Issue (i): whether the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority should be condoned.

Analysis: The delay was found to have occurred during the initial period of the GST regime, when confusion and lack of clarity persisted both among departmental officers and assessees. The record did not indicate deliberate inaction or wilful negligence on the part of the appellant, and the circumstances were treated as sufficient to entertain the appeal in the interest of justice.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether the refund of duty payable under the transitional regime was required to be granted in cash instead of being credited to the Cenvat account.

Analysis: Under the transitional refund mechanism, claims pending on the appointed day were required to be dealt with under the existing law, and the amount eventually accruing to the claimant was payable in cash. Since the rebate/refund had already been sanctioned and the transitional provision mandated cash payment, crediting the amount to the Cenvat account was held to be a mistake apparent from the record. The order was therefore modified to align the refund with the statutory transitional mandate.

Conclusion: The refund was held to be payable in cash and not by credit to the Cenvat account, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appellate order was interfered with and the refund entitlement was corrected so that the assessee received cash refund with consequential interest.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the transitional provisions expressly require refund claims arising under the existing law to be paid in cash, an order directing credit to the Cenvat account is liable to be corrected, and delay caused by the confusion of the initial GST regime may be condoned in the interest of justice.

---