https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413479 The appellant paid service tax under reverse charge mechanism following an audit that identified liability for foreign remittances to parent company. Though eligible for input tax credit, the payment was made after the GST transition deadline expired. CESTAT held that Section 142(8) of CGST Act, which denies input credit for arrears recovery, was misapplied. The case involved refund claim under erstwhile law, not assessment proceedings. Section 142(3) governs refund claims for amounts paid under previous law, requiring disposal according to erstwhile provisions. CESTAT allowed the appeal, ruling refund claim rejection was misplaced. en-us Mon, 11 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jun 2025 12:58:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413479 The appellant paid service tax under reverse charge mechanism following an audit that identified liability for foreign remittances to parent company. Though eligible for input tax credit, the payment was made after the GST transition deadline expired. CESTAT held that Section 142(8) of CGST Act, which denies input credit for arrears recovery, was misapplied. The case involved refund claim under erstwhile law, not assessment proceedings. Section 142(3) governs refund claims for amounts paid under previous law, requiring disposal according to erstwhile provisions. CESTAT allowed the appeal, ruling refund claim rejection was misplaced. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 11 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413479