2019 (12) TMI 712

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Cenvat credit availed on the services in question before filing the refund claim. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is an exporter of goods and availed Cenvat credit on the inputs and services in question for export. The appellant filed refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012-ST dt. 18.06.2012 for the Cenvat credit remained in their Cenvat credit account unutilized on 27.02.2013 for the period upto March, 2012. As per the condition of the said Notification, the Cenvat credit availed by the appellant in question is required to be reversed. Admittedly, the said Cenvat credit was not reversed by the appellant before filing the refund claim, therefore, the refund claim was rejected. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urn. Later on, the appellant has reversed the Cenvat credit in GSTR-3B return. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. and this Tribunal observed as under: 4. I have gone through the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Global Analytics India Pvt.Ltd. (supra) wherein the facts of the case are as under:- "3.1 It is the case of the assessee that the assessee is engaged in providing data analytics and information technology services to its customers located outside India and by virtue of having fulfilled the conditions as per Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 2004, it assumed that the output services qualified to be export of services. Accordingly, in order to avail input services and CENVAT Credit of Service Tax, it ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ystem to debit the value of refund and also the fact that the entire credit which was carried forward in TRAN-1 stood reversed by the appellant voluntarily in its GSTR-3B filed for the month of April 2018. 7.2 The above facts, according to me, are sufficient compliances with the condition at paragraph 2(h) since post G.S.T., the scenario is different than the one prevailing prior to G.S.T. regime. Otherwise, it would become an impossible task for an assessee, more so when the filing of ST-3 returns itself was done away with. 8. I also note that the Board has clarified the above position in its Circular No. 58/32/2018-G.S.T. (supra) and I also note that more or less the same view is expressed in all the orders relied on by the Ld. Advo....