AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 237
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reverse charge mechanism, in respect of the services imported by them The appellant is paying trademark fee for usage of the trademark of its group company namely, East West Seed International Ltd, Thailand (EWSILT). 2.2 Appellant had entered into contract for trademark fees with its associated enterprise EWSILT for use of trademark wef. 01.01.2017. As on 30.06.2017, the appellant had made provision of Rs.2,28,27,342/- for the contract based on the initial communication from EWŞILT. Accordingly, the appellant paid the service tax @15% on Rs.2,28,27,342/- amounting to Rs.34,24,102/-. Subsequently the period of the agreement got revised to 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 and the amount of fee also was reduced to Rs.59,39,180/-. The service tax liability of the reduced fee amount was Rs.8,89,574/-, thus the service tax paid in excess amounting to Rs.25,34,528/- (Rs.34,24,102 - Rs.8,89,574) is claimed as refund. 2.3 On verification of the subject Refund Claim, it was observed that • The claimant has not submitted any document on which basis the Invoice No. T-17/003 dated 31.05.2017 for USD $ 241000 and Invoice No. T-17/008 dated 30.06.2017 for $ 112000 has been issued....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which has been paid by the claimant, would get covered under the self-assessment and discharge of service tax liability by the claimant appears to be not refundable to the claimant. 2.4 Therefore, a Show Cause Notice bearing Sr. No. R- 09/ST/DC/RURAL/2018-19 dated 09.07.2018 asking them to show cause as to why, the refund claim of 25,34,574/- should not be rejected under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 for the reasons stated above 2.4 The show cause notice was adjudicated as per the order in original referred in para 1 above and the appeal filed by the appellant before Commissioner (Appeal) has been rejected as per the impugned order. 2.5 Aggrieved appellant have filed this appeal. 3.1 I have heard Shri Sachin Mishra, Advocate for the Appellant and Shri Sunil Kumar Katiyar, Assistant Commissioner, Authorized Representative for the revenue. 3.2 Arguing for the appellant learned counsel submits:- • When the excess payment of service tax is not in dispute, the appellant is very much eligible for refund of excess service tax under section 11B of the central excise act, 1944 • Issue is squarely covered by decision of Hon'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rely filed before the order of assessment (i.e. order of self assessment} being varied, therefore, the refund claim appears to be legally barred in as much as the assessment made by them was not varied on its merit by any authority. • Priya Blue Industries Ltd. [2004 (172) ELT 145 (S.C.)] • Maharashtra Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (259) ELT 369 (BOM)] • Flock India Pvt Ltd [2000 (120) ELT 285 (SC)] • ITC Ltd [2019 (368) ELT 216 (SC)] • As per Para 10 of the O-in-A the lower authority have already considered the above contentions of the appellant in the impugned order and has held that refund was not eligible to the appellant in view of the provisions of Subsection 9(b) of Section 142 of CGST Act, 2071. • As per Para 11 of the O-in-A, the Sub-section 9(b) of Section 142 of Act, Ibid, requires the revision of return furnished under the existing law after the appointed day to be made within the time limit specified for such revision. In the instant case there is no such possibility as already stated by the appellant. Thus is the above circumstances, the refund claim does not qualify the relevant provisions of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other general provisions in the Act. • Statutory limit has been intended by the legislature under Sub-section 9(b) of Section 142 of CGST Act. 2017. This is a special provision under, which has been introduced into the statue for a particular purpose. The special provision would thus override the other general provisions. • the exemption and conditions provided under the Finance Act are required to be strictly complied with for availing its benefit and therefore exemption denied for nonobservance of said conditions as provided under the Finance Act, keeping in mind ratio of following judgments (including the ratio of above judgment of Hon'ble Supreme in the case of ITC LTD, wherein it was held that - "Refund claim cannot be entertained unless the order of assessment or self assessment is modified in accordance with law by taking recourse to the appropriate proceedings"); - • JSW Dharamtar Port Pvt Ltd [2019 (20) GSTL 721 (Bom)] • Mafatlal Industries Ltd. [1997 (89) ELT 247 (SC)] • Ald Automotive Ltd. [2018 (364) ELT 3 (SC)] • Willowood Chemicals Pvt Ltd. [2018 (19) GSTL 228 (Guj)] • Doab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fied for such revision under the existing law and if, pursuant to such revision, any amount is found to be refundable or CENVAT credit is found to be admissible to any taxable person, the same shall be refunded to him in cash under the existing law, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the amount rejected, if any, shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act," 11. On examining the facts of the case, it is observed that the appellant had paid service tax of Rs.34,24,102/- on 06.07.2017 on the basis of provision made in their books. They filed the ST- 3 return for the period from 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 on 14.08.2017 showing transaction value of 2,28,27,342/- and payment of service tax amounting to Rs.34,24,102/-. They signed the Trademark Agreement on 01.06.2017, which was effective from 01.04.2017 whereas they had paid service tax on the provisions made from 01.01.2017 to 30.06.2017. This resulted is payment of excess service tax amounting to Rs.25,34,528/-. Credit note was issued to them by EWSILT on 31.08.2017 and the revised invoic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....presumptive basis, had sufficient time to revise the return which opportunity was lost only on account of laches to follow the prescribed procedure for such revision, that could have permitted them for entitlement to refund. It is also not the appellant's case that the assessment carried out by them, purportedly on erroneous assumption, has been revised/reviewed/ annulled by any other means. By now it is settled law that a Refund Claim proceeding is not a Appeal proceeding to prevail upon any assessment including self assessment. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case law of Maharastra Cylinders Pvt Ltd [2010 (259) ELT 0369(Bom)] has laid down as under - "8. Where the goods are cleared under the self removal procedure basis on approved classification list and approved price list, the clearances are on self assessment and unless such self assessment is varied or altered, the question of refunding the duty paid on self assessment does not arise at all. The Apex Court in the case of M/s. Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) [AIR 2004 S.C. 5115 - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.)] has held that validity of an assessment cannot be considered....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#39;s imagine the government decided to impose an increased tax on cigarettes. In this case, the producers may increase the sale price by the full amount of the tax. If consumers still purchased cigarettes in the same amount after the increase in price, it would be said that the tax incidence fell entirely on the buyers. Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tax incidence.asp In economics, tax incidence or tax burden is the analysis of the effect of a particular tax on the distribution of economic .... welfare. ........ Tax incidence is said to "fall" upon the group that ultimately bears the burden of, or ultimately has to pay, the tax. The key concept is that the tax incidence or tax burden does not depend on where the revenue is collected, but on the price elasticity of demand and price elasticity of supply. The theory of tax incidence has a number of practical results. For example, United States Social Security payroll taxes are paid half by the employee and half by the employer. However, some economists think that the worker bears almost the entire burden of the tax because the employer passes the tax on in the form of lower wages. The tax inci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on record to establish the effect of such credit notes in their accounts. In the absence of any evidence in this regard, their claim for refund of such service tax cannot be accepted as from the definition of Incidence of Tax it becomes clear that what is meant by such incidence is a final money burden of tax or final resting place of tax. In this regard, it would be relevant to refer to the text reference cited in sub clause (iv) in the preceding para hereinabove which states that the incidence of tax may shift in any direction, forward, backward or to depress even the wages of the employees. Nevertheless, ultimate incidences of all taxes shift from business to the consumers. Mere reflection of such amounts in any account book does not reflect the status of actual shifting of incidence. I therefore, am of the considered view that the appellant has not brought forth any evidence to establish that they have not passed on the incidence of tax to any other person and have thus failed to cross the bar of unjust enrichment in the instant case. The appeal therefore fails on this count too. 4.3 Assistant Commissioner has in order in original recorded as follows: "4.4 I further....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n, the same shall be refunded to him in cash under the existing law, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the amount rejected, if any, shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act. Since claimant has not filed the revised return within a period of 45 days from the date of original return filed, hence I find that the refund is not admissible to the claimant. 4.8 Further I find that where the claimant for any reason is not able to correctly estimate his service tax liability for any particular quarter or month, then he may request in writing to the AC / DC of Service Tax, as the case may be, giving reasons for payment of service tax on provisional basis and the AC / DC on receipt of such application may allow the assessee for payment of service tax on provisional basis on such value of taxable service as may be specified by him. I also find that after finalization of assessment he/she may either pay the differential Service Tax or file a refund claim, if Service Tax has been paid more during provisional assessment. I find that the claima....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax collected from him or to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate direction of refund. The only controversy on this score is whether the manufacturer/payer is entitled to such refund where he has already passed on the burden of the duty to others. 21. With respect to the second category of cases, there is a good amount of controversy. While the Union of India says that such claims of refund should be put forward and determined only under and in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules, the contention of the appellants-petitioners is that even in such cases a suit or writ is maintainable on the ground that the tax has been collected without the authority of law, i.e., contrary to Article 265 of the Constitution. In other words, while according to the Union of India, such claims of refund should be filed within the time prescribed by the Act and the Rules and should and can be dealt with only under the provisions of the Act and the Rules, the appellants-petitioners say that such claims can be made in suits and writ petitions as well and that too without reference to the period of limitation prescribed in Rule 11 or Secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed upon public policy, is the sanctity attaching to the finality of any proceeding, be it a suit or any other proceeding. Where a duty has been collected under a particular order which has become final, the refund of that duty cannot be claimed unless the order (whether it is an order of assessment, adjudication or any other order under which the duty is paid) is set aside according to law. So long as that order stands, the duty cannot be recovered back nor can any claim for its refund be entertained. But what is happening now is that the duty which has been paid under a proceeding which has become final long ago - may be an year back, ten years back or even twenty or more years back - is sought to be recovered on the ground of alleged discovery of mistake of law on the basis of a decision of a High Court or the Supreme Court. It is necessary to point out in this behalf that for filing an appeal or for adopting a remedy provided by the Act, the limitation generally prescribed is about three months (little more or less does not matter). But according to the present practice, writs and suits are being filed after lapse of a long number of years and the rule of limitation ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orities under the Act as matters falling within their jurisdiction. Whether or not a return is correct and whether a transaction is exigible to tax or not are all matters to be determined by the authorities under the Act. The argument that the finding of the authority that a particular transaction is taxable under the Act is a finding on a collateral fact and, therefore, resort to civil court is open, was expressly rejected and it was affirmed that the whole activity of assessment beginning with the filing of the return and ending with the order of assessment falls within the jurisdiction of the authorities under the Act and no part of it can be said to constitute a collateral activity not specifically or expressly included in the jurisdiction of the authorities under the Act. It was clarified that even if the authority under the Act holds erroneously, while exercising its jurisdiction and powers under the Act that a transaction is taxable, it cannot be said that the decision of the authority is without jurisdiction. We respectfully agree with the above propositions and hold that the said principles apply with equal force in the case of both the Central Excises and Salt Act and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anufacturer/assessee. (See the pertinent observations of Hidayatullah, CJ. in Tilokchand Motichand extracted in Para 37). The decisions of this Court saying to the contrary must be held to have been decided wrongly and are accordingly overruled herewith." 4.4 The principles as stated by the Hon'ble Apex Court as above have been subsequently re-iterated by them again and again and in the case of ITC Ltd. [2019 (368) ELT 216 (SC) ] wherein the all the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been referred. "19. On behalf of the Union of India/Department, it is contended that self-assessment is an assessment. It is not open to the proper officer after accepting the self-assessment to entertain a claim for refund in the absence of the selfassessment being questioned in the appeal. The direction to reassess the bill of entry after the expiry of more than a year cannot be ordered. Reliance has been placed on Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd., 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.). In the instant case, the bills of entry were filed and they were self-assessed. It is an assessment under the Act and in case benefit of notification has not been claimed, in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expression as no separate reasoned assessment order is required to be passed in the case of self-assessment as observed by this Court in Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. (supra). 39. In Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.) = (2000) 6 SCC 650, the question which came up for consideration before this Court was non-challenge of an appealable order where the adjudicating authority had passed an order which is appealable under the statute, and the party aggrieved did not choose to file an appeal. This Court held that it is not open to the party to question the correctness of the order of the adjudicating authority subsequently by filing a claim for refund on the ground that the adjudicating authority had committed an error in passing the order. The provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 came up for consideration. The Court has observed : "10. Coming to the question that is raised, there is little scope for doubt that in a case where an adjudicating authority has passed an order which is appealable under the statute and the party aggrieved did not choose to exercise the statutory right of filing an appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order stands. So long as the order of assessment stands the duty would be payable as per that order of assessment. A refund claim is not an appeal proceeding. The officer considering a refund claim cannot sit in appeal over an assessment made by a competent officer. The officer considering the refund claim cannot also review an assessment order. 7. We also see no substance in the contention that provision for a period of limitation indicates that a refund claim could be filed without filing an appeal. Even under Section 11 under the Excise Act, the claim for refund had to be filed within a period of six months. It was still held, in Flock (India)'s case (supra), that in the absence of an appeal having been filed no refund claim could be made. 8. The words "in pursuance of an order of assessment" only indicate the party/person who can make a claim for refund. In other words, they enable a person who has paid duty in pursuance of an order of assessment to claim the refund. These words do not lead to the conclusion that without the order of assessment having been modified in appeal or reviewed a claim for refund can be maintained." (emphasis supplied) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 2(2), as such, it is appealable in case any person is aggrieved by it. There is a specific provision made in Section 17 to pass a reasoned/speaking order in the situation in case on verification, self-assessment is not found to be satisfactory, an order of re-assessment has to be passed under Section 17(4). Section 128 has not provided for an appeal against a speaking order but against "any order" which is of wide amplitude. The reasoning employed by the High Court is that since there is no lis, no speaking order is passed, as such an appeal would not lie, is not sustainable in law, is contrary to what has been held by this Court in Escorts (supra). 44. The provisions under Section 27 cannot be invoked in the absence of amendment or modification having been made in the bill of entry on the basis of which self-assessment has been made. In other words, the order of self-assessment is required to be followed unless modified before the claim for refund is entertained under Section 27. The refund proceedings are in the nature of execution for refunding amount. It is not assessment or re-assessment proceedings at all. Apart from that, there are other conditions which are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lated only in cases where the notice is issued under Section 73, and it is found, that service tax is not levied or paid, or has been short levied or short paid etc. In that view of the matter, the very basis/reasonings given by the learned Tribunal, simply have no legs to stand. Admittedly, the appeal under Section 85 lies against a specific order of the concerned authority in Form ST-4, which requires to disclose, designation and address of the officer passing the decision or order appealed against, and the date of decision or order, so also the date of communication of the decision or order appealed against to the appellant. Admittedly, when no order capable of being appealed against, had ever been passed, it cannot be said that the assessee could file appeal against the assessment order, and not having so filed appeal he cannot lay the claim of refund. Thus, the order of the Tribunal cannot sustain." 4.5 In the case of Maharastra Cylinder [2010 (259) ELT 369 (Bom)], Hon'ble Bombay High Court expressed disagreement with the view expressed by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, stating as follows: "6. It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia - 2008 (12) S.T.R. 545 (Raj.). In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are not inclined to accept the reasoning adopted by the High Court, that too is also not under the provisions of the Customs Act." 4.7 Appellant has relied upon the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench in case of Cadila Healthcare [2021 (50) ELT 205 (TAhmd)], wherein tribunal has observed as follows: "5.We also observed that the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Central Office of Mewar Palace Org. v. Union of India (supra) has been expressly approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITC Ltd. (supra) as the Hon'ble Supreme Court stated that High Court judgment is not under provisions of the Customs Act. Therefore, unlike Customs, there is no express provision to file appeal against the selfassessment of service tax by filing ST-3 return. Therefore, on the ground that appeal against the self-assessment was not filed, the refund claim cannot be rejected." The observations made do not take into account the provisions of Section 70 and 72 of the Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994, Rule 2 (b) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and Self Assessment Memorandum appended to ST-3 return....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-yearly return electronically. Format of ST-3 Return provides as under: "FORM ST-3" (Return under section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with rule 7 of Service Tax Rules, 1994) ..... PART K SELF ASSESSMENT MEMORANDUM: (a) I/We declare that the above particulars are in accordance with the records and books maintained by me/us and are correctly stated. (b) I/We have assessed and paid the service tax and/or availed and distributed CENVAT credit correctly as per the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 and the rules made thereunder. (c) I/We have paid duty within the specified time limit and in case of delay, I/We have deposited the interest leviable thereon. (d) I have been authorised as the person to file the return on behalf of the person providing the taxable service/recipient of service, as the case may be. Place: Date: (Name and Signature of Assessee or Authorised Signatory) The above provisions are pari materia with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 as have been reproduced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITC Ltd, supra. The relevant par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the importer or exporter, as may be expedient, in such manner as may be prescribed. Explanation. - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that in cases where an importer has entered any imported goods under Section 46 or an exporter has entered any export goods under Section 50 before the date on which the Finance Bill, 2011 receives the assent of the President, such imported goods or export goods shall continue to be governed by the provisions of Section 17 as it stood immediately before the date on which such assent is received. 31. It is apparent from the aforesaid discussion that the endorsement made on the bill of entry is an order of assessment. It cannot be said that there is no order of assessment passed in such a case. When there is no lis, speaking order is not required to be passed in "across the counter affair". 33. Under the provisions of Section 17 as amended by Finance Act of 2011, Section 17(1) has provided to self-assess the duty if any leviable on such goods by importer or exporter as the case may be. Self-assessment is an assessment as per the amended definition of Section 2(2). It is further provided that proper officer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ollows: "(9) (a) where any return, furnished under the existing law, is revised after the appointed day and if, pursuant to such revision, any amount is found to be recoverable or any amount of CENVAT credit is found to be inadmissible, the same shall, unless recovered under the existing law, be recovered as an arrear of tax under this Act and the amount so recovered shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act; (b) where any return, furnished under the existing law, is revised after the appointed day but within the time limit specified for such revision under the existing law and if, pursuant to such revision, any amount is found to be refundable or CENVAT credit is found to be admissible to any taxable person, the same shall be refunded to him in cash under the existing law, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and the amount rejected, if any, shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act." 4.9 Admittedly no revised return as provided for in terms of Rule 7B of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 or under pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e period of limitation. That, however, was not done................" 16. The said principle has been followed by this Court in Cherukuri Mani v. Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. [(2015) 13 SCC 722] wherein this Court held as under: "14. Where the law prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner following a particular procedure, it shall be done in the same manner following the provisions of law, without deviating from the prescribed procedure............." 17. Similarly, this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) v. Abhilash Lal & Ors. [(2020) 13 SCC 234] and OPTO Circuit India Limited v. Axis Bank & Ors. [(2021) 6 SCC 707] has followed the said principle. ...". 4.10 Appellant relied upon the decision of the tribunal in the case of Piramal Enterprises Ltd. [2016 (42) STR 17 (T)], wherein following has been held: "7. The short point for consideration by us is whether there has been excess payment of tax and whether the bar of unjust enrichment will arise in relation to such excess payment of tax. 8. It is now well settled in law that adjustment between commercial enterprises who are in cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed: PROVIDED that the registered person shall not be allowed to take credit in the following circumstances, namely: - (i) where the said amount of credit is not admissible as input tax credit under this Act; or (ii) where he has not furnished all the returns required under the existing law for the period of six months immediately preceding the appointed date; or (iii) where the said amount of credit relates to goods manufactured and cleared under such exemption notifications as are notified by the Government. 140 (5) A registered person shall be entitled to take, in his electronic credit ledger, credit of eligible duties and taxes in respect of inputs or input services received on or after the appointed day but the duty or tax in respect of which has been paid by the supplier under the existing law, within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed, subject to the condition that the invoice or any other duty or tax paying document of the same was recorded in the books of account of such person within a period of thirty days from the appointed day: PROVIDED that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e or existing at the time of such amendment or repeal; or ii. affect the previous operation of the amended Act or repealed Acts and orders or anything duly done or suffered thereunder; or iii. affect any right, privilege, obligation, or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the amended Act or repealed Acts or orders under such repealed or amended Acts: i. PROVIDED that any tax exemption granted as an incentive against investment through a notification shall not continue as privilege if the said notification is rescinded on or after the appointed day; or iv. affect any duty, tax, surcharge, fine, penalty, interest as are due or may become due or any forfeiture or punishment incurred or inflicted in respect of any offence or violation committed against the provisions of the amended Act or repealed Acts; or v. affect any investigation, inquiry, verification (including scrutiny and audit), assessment proceedings, adjudication and any other legal proceedings or recovery of arrears or remedy in respect of any such duty, tax, surcharge, penalty, fine, interest, right, privilege, obligation, liability, forfeiture or punishment, as afores....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 41. Thus, section 142(3) of CGST, Act clearly provides that refund application with respect of any amount relating to CENVAT Credit, duty, tax, interest or any other amount paid under the existing law is to be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of existing law and if any such amount accrues the same shall be paid in cash. Such right to refund in cash has been conferred notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the provisions of existing law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 42. It is not in dispute that the refunds under the existing law of Service Tax as well as Central Excise Act, 1944 are governed by section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and subsection 2 of section 11 B also refers to application for refund made under section 11 B(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Further section 11B(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 clearly provides that all kinds of refunds including those arising out of judgement , decree or orders of court or tribunal are to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 11B (2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 . It is also important to note that se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch right under the existing law or where the right under the existing law has extinguished or where right under the new CGST regime with respect to such claim has not been exercised in terms of the provision of CGST, Act and the rules framed and notifications issued. Meaning thereby, section 142(3) does not confer a new right which never existed under the old regime except to the manner of giving relief by refund in cash if the person is found entitled under the existing law in terms of the existing law. Section 142(3) does not create any new right on any person but it saves the existing right which existed on the appointed day and provides the modalities for refund in cash if found entitled under the existing law as the entire claim is mandated to be dealt with as per the existing law. It neither revive any right which stood extinguished in terms of the existing law nor does it create a new right by virtue of coming into force of CGST, Act. 46. Section 174 of the CGST Act read with section 6 of the General Clauses Act saves the right acquired, accrued or vested under the existing law and does not create any new right which never existed on the appointed day i.e on 01.07.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he credit of service tax involved in the present case paid on "port services" as "input service" in ST-3 return filed on 22.09.2017, though they were not entitled to claim such a credit. It is further not in dispute that the petitioner did not include the impugned service tax paid on "port services" in its ER-1 return and accordingly was neither entitled to include nor included the same as transitional credit in TRAN-1 under CGST Act. As per the notification (Annexure-5) extending the date of filing TRAN-1 to 31.10.2017, the same was in relation to certain service tax issues which were paid after 30.06.2017 under reverse charge basis to cover instances of bills raised on 30.06.2017 since credit is available only if the payment is made and the payment in such cases could be made only after 30.06.2017. However, in the instant case the bill was admittedly generated on 23.05.2017, services availed and bill amount including service tax was paid in April 2017 but the original bill did not reach the petitioner for unknown/undisclosed reasons. 51. It is apparent from the impugned orders that the specific case of the respondent is that the petitioner had claimed CENVAT Credit under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urn of service tax although admittedly the petitioner was not entitled to take such credit in ST-3 Return. On account of aforesaid three distinct reasons the petitioner was rightly held to be not entitled to refund under section 142(3) of CGST, Act by the impugned orders. 53. All the aforesaid provisions referred to and relied upon by the learned counsel of the petitioner do not entitle a person like the petitioner to any relief in the circumstances of acts and omissions of the service provider (port authority) or the service recipient (the petitioner) who have failed to comply the provision of law, both under the existing law and also under the CGST Act. The relied upon provisions of CGST Act do not cover any such situation relating to any consequences due to inter parte acts and omissions. In the instant case, as per the case of the petitioner, the entire problem has cropped up due to non-receipt of the invoice in original from the port authorities although the port services were availed and payments for the same to the port authorities were made by the petitioner in the month of April 2017, the invoice was generated by the port authorities in the month of May 2017 but t....