https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780724 CESTAT (Mumbai) allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and directing refund of excess CENVAT credit of Rs. 8,36,196 to the appellants. The Tribunal held that Section 142(3) and 142(9)(b) of the CGST Act operate as overriding transitional provisions permitting cash refund of CENVAT credit despite earlier Central Excise rules, and that requirements under Section 11B apply except for the unjust enrichment clause already found satisfied by the original authority. en-us Tue, 11 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Nov 2025 15:46:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780724 CESTAT (Mumbai) allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and directing refund of excess CENVAT credit of Rs. 8,36,196 to the appellants. The Tribunal held that Section 142(3) and 142(9)(b) of the CGST Act operate as overriding transitional provisions permitting cash refund of CENVAT credit despite earlier Central Excise rules, and that requirements under Section 11B apply except for the unjust enrichment clause already found satisfied by the original authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780724