https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784669 Section 142(9)(b) CGST Act was interpreted to permit an assessee to seek cash refund of eligible pre-GST CENVAT credit even if it was not carried forward through TRAN-1, since the assessee may opt for the more beneficial statutory route; denial of refund solely for non-carry-forward was held unsustainable. On the Department's objection that the ST-3 return showed credit as "inputs" while supporting documents related to "input services," the Tribunal held the mismatch to be a rectifiable classification error not going to the root of entitlement, as the credit balance was admitted and no mala fides were shown; refund could not be rejected on this technicality. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:25:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784669 Section 142(9)(b) CGST Act was interpreted to permit an assessee to seek cash refund of eligible pre-GST CENVAT credit even if it was not carried forward through TRAN-1, since the assessee may opt for the more beneficial statutory route; denial of refund solely for non-carry-forward was held unsustainable. On the Department's objection that the ST-3 return showed credit as "inputs" while supporting documents related to "input services," the Tribunal held the mismatch to be a rectifiable classification error not going to the root of entitlement, as the credit balance was admitted and no mala fides were shown; refund could not be rejected on this technicality. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784669