TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 376
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er 2016, January 2017 to March 2017 and April 2017 to June 2017, on 28.09.2017 to 02.01.2018 and 27.03.2018 respectively of Rs. 14,33,076/- Rs. 15,37,420/- and Rs. 12,68,941/-. The refund claims were initially rejected alleging that appellant did not fulfill the condition of para -2(h) of the Notification No. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.06.2012 wherein appellant is required to reverse Cenvat credit before filing the refund claim at the time of claiming the refund. The appellant submits that after introduction of the GST regime, there was no provision for reversal of Cenvat credit in their Cenvat credit account. Therefore, they debited the same in their books of accounts and produced it before the authorities below. The appellant also submitted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted fact for the period January 2017 to June 2017 they have reversed the Cenvat credit after filing the refund claim and it is the condition of the notification that before claiming the refund they are required to reverse the Cenvat credit and as the reversal has taken place in June 2018 and if the refund claim are filed after June 2018, the refund claims could have been barred by limitation. Therefore, the refund claims were rightly rejected by the authorities below. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. In this case, the sole is issue that in terms of Notification No. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.06.2012, the assessee is required to reverse the Cenvat credit to claim refund. 7. Admittedly, in this case the appellant has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same to electronic credit ledger. 8. I also observe that the Commissioner (Appeals) has miserably failed to observe that with the introduction of the GST Act filing of ST-3 return was absolutely done away due to which there was no other possible way with the appellant to debit and to reflect the existing credit in its ST-3 return. The Notification No. 27/2012 dated 18.6.2012 with its condition No 2(h), to my opinion, was applicable only during the period prior to GST regime. Since the GST regime has done away with the ST 3 return, there remain no provision in GST system to reflect the refund claim in the CENVAT credit balance. The only option was to show its reversal in the Books of accounts. Such reversal still amounts to non ava....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ground that credit reversal in GSTR3B pertains to GST credit and not cenvat credit and by invoking Section 142(3) and Section 142(4), he disallowed the refunds. On perusal of the documents on record, I find that eligibility of the appellant to claim refund is not disputed and it is also not disputed that the appellant has debited the amount claimed in the GSTR3B. I also find that the Tribunal has consistently held that credit reversed without being utilized considered as if credit has not been taken. Hence the credit reversed in GSTR-3B tantamounts to not been taken credit in clause 1. Further in the case of JCT Limited Vs. CCE, Jalandhar and Ludhiana [2015(2) TMI 600- CESTAT NEW DELHI), this Tribunal relying upon the judgment of the Hon'bl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts when they have debited the amount not on the date of filing refund claim but on a later date. It is seen that the conditions prescribed in the notification having met although on a later date. The failure to debit on the date of filing the refund claim is not such a lapse that it would debar the appellants from the refund. On the day of debiting the cenvat account they have fulfilled the conditions of the notification. In that event they become entitled to refund on that date. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside, the appeal is allowed with consequential benefit. ....." 5. In view of my discussion above, I find that the appellant has reversed the credit in the GSTR-3B; but there was only a delay in debiting the....