https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760382 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal challenging rejection of refund claim for amount paid under reverse charge mechanism (RCM). The tribunal held that Rule 9(1)(e) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 applies to RCM payments, not Rule 9(1)(bb) as incorrectly applied by authorities, making the credit eligible for transition to GST regime. The appellant was entitled to transfer the amount as TRAN-1 credit under section 140 of CGST Act 2017, having applied within the prescribed timeline. The tribunal emphasized that transitional credit constitutes a vested right that cannot be denied on procedural or technical grounds, setting aside the impugned order and allowing refund under section 142 of CGST Act 2017. en-us Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2024 12:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760382 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal challenging rejection of refund claim for amount paid under reverse charge mechanism (RCM). The tribunal held that Rule 9(1)(e) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 applies to RCM payments, not Rule 9(1)(bb) as incorrectly applied by authorities, making the credit eligible for transition to GST regime. The appellant was entitled to transfer the amount as TRAN-1 credit under section 140 of CGST Act 2017, having applied within the prescribed timeline. The tribunal emphasized that transitional credit constitutes a vested right that cannot be denied on procedural or technical grounds, setting aside the impugned order and allowing refund under section 142 of CGST Act 2017. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760382