https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752470 CESTAT Hyderabad rejected the appellant's refund claim for service tax paid under Reverse Charge Mechanism. The appellant paid service tax after audit pointed out non-compliance, then sought refund claiming eligibility for CENVAT credit and subsequent refund under Section 142(3) of CGST Act 2017. The tribunal held that the appellant incorrectly attempted to combine different refund provisions across Central Excise Act 1944, CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, and CGST Act 2017. Since service tax was paid post-GST implementation after audit detection rather than timely payment, and refund claim for the relevant quarter was already filed and availed, the claim lacked merit and legal basis. en-us Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2024 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752470 CESTAT Hyderabad rejected the appellant's refund claim for service tax paid under Reverse Charge Mechanism. The appellant paid service tax after audit pointed out non-compliance, then sought refund claiming eligibility for CENVAT credit and subsequent refund under Section 142(3) of CGST Act 2017. The tribunal held that the appellant incorrectly attempted to combine different refund provisions across Central Excise Act 1944, CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, and CGST Act 2017. Since service tax was paid post-GST implementation after audit detection rather than timely payment, and refund claim for the relevant quarter was already filed and availed, the claim lacked merit and legal basis. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752470