Alternate statutory remedy governs GST assessment challenge, with statutory appeal preserved and limitation objection barred for the permitted filing ...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant entitled to refund of unutilised CENVAT credit paid on input services used for export of services. The Tribunal accepted proof of export and inward remittances and applied Board guidance that one-to-one correlation between export invoices and FIRCs is not requisite for refund. It further rejected denial based on asserted lack of nexus between input and output services, finding such a ground insufficient to withhold refund where credit availing is otherwise not impeached. The Tribunal also held the relevant date for limitation may be the quarter-end when FIRCs are received for quarterly refund filings, negating delay objections.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant entitled to refund of unutilised CENVAT credit paid on input services used for export of services. The Tribunal accepted proof of export and inward remittances and applied Board guidance that one-to-one correlation between export invoices and FIRCs is not requisite for refund. It further rejected denial based on asserted lack of nexus between input and output services, finding such a ground insufficient to withhold refund where credit availing is otherwise not impeached. The Tribunal also held the relevant date for limitation may be the quarter-end when FIRCs are received for quarterly refund filings, negating delay objections.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
