https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760658 A claim for cash refund of service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism was held not admissible under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act because that provision does not create an independent right to refund. Refund had to be supportable under the existing law, and Section 142(6) was found inapplicable on the facts. The claim was also rejected under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, as the refund was not otherwise legally due. The argument based on Section 174 and on credit as a substantive right failed, since credit was treated as a concession rather than an absolute entitlement to cash refund. en-us Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760658 A claim for cash refund of service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism was held not admissible under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act because that provision does not create an independent right to refund. Refund had to be supportable under the existing law, and Section 142(6) was found inapplicable on the facts. The claim was also rejected under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, as the refund was not otherwise legally due. The argument based on Section 174 and on credit as a substantive right failed, since credit was treated as a concession rather than an absolute entitlement to cash refund. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760658