TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Authorities Must Review CENVAT Credit Claim Within 4 Weeks, Provide Comprehensive Response to Petitioner's GST Regulation Concerns</h1> <h3>M/s Console Shipping Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue & Ors.</h3> HC ruled on CENVAT credit carry forward dispute, directing tax authorities to review interest claim within four weeks. The court mandated a comprehensive ... Seeking a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to carry forward an amount of Central Value Added Tax (CENVAT) CENVAT credit plus a sum as interest paid in Electronic Credit Ledger maintained under GST through GST 3B return - HELD THAT:- Instead of relegating the petitioner to filing an application, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondents to treat this petition as a representation with regard to grant of interest on the alleged delayed carry forward of the CENVAT credit in accordance with law. A speaking order be passed by the respondents within a period of four weeks from today. It will be open to the petitioner to take such further remedy as may be permissible in law, in case petitioner is dissatisfied with such an order. Issues involved:The judgment involves a petition seeking direction to carry forward CENVAT credit and interest under GST, focusing on the delay in permitting the carry forward of CENVAT credit.CENVAT Credit Issue:The petitioner sought to carry forward an amount of Rs. 13,94,961/- CENVAT credit and Rs. 8,98,763/- as interest in the Electronic Credit Ledger under GST through GST 3B return. During the case, CENVAT credit of Rs. 10,36,932 was granted, but the Input Tax Credit of the remaining amount was rejected. The only unresolved issue was the interest on the delay in permitting the carry forward of CENVAT credit.Legal Interpretation Issue:The respondents argued that the carry forward occurred during the transitional period and migration of existing taxpayers as per Section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. They contended that there is no automatic payment of interest under Section 56 of the Act for delayed refunds. The respondents suggested that upon filing an application, the Department would decide on the grant of interest as per the law.Judgment:The Court decided not to require the petitioner to file a separate application and directed the respondents to consider the petition as a representation regarding the grant of interest on the delayed carry forward of CENVAT credit in compliance with the law. The respondents were instructed to issue a speaking order within four weeks. The petitioner was granted the option to pursue further legal remedies if dissatisfied with the outcome.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
