https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775072 CESTAT Allahabad disposed of an appeal concerning cash refund of Cenvat Credit for export of services under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The revenue denied refund claiming certain Cenvat Credits were inadmissible, but failed to invoke Rule 14 proceedings. Following precedent in HCL Technologies case, the Tribunal held that observations denying credit without proper Rule 14 proceedings cannot constitute valid denial. However, since the appellant had re-credited the amounts, no refund was granted at that stage. The Tribunal also rejected the interest claim under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944, as no formal refund proceedings under Section 11B existed when appellant suo-motto debited the credit for making refund claims under Rule 5. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jul 2025 08:25:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775072 CESTAT Allahabad disposed of an appeal concerning cash refund of Cenvat Credit for export of services under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The revenue denied refund claiming certain Cenvat Credits were inadmissible, but failed to invoke Rule 14 proceedings. Following precedent in HCL Technologies case, the Tribunal held that observations denying credit without proper Rule 14 proceedings cannot constitute valid denial. However, since the appellant had re-credited the amounts, no refund was granted at that stage. The Tribunal also rejected the interest claim under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944, as no formal refund proceedings under Section 11B existed when appellant suo-motto debited the credit for making refund claims under Rule 5. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775072