TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f service, dated 18th March 2018, stipulated licencing of 148625 sq ft and invoice for the disputed period reflected tax of Rs. 7,06,075 which, upon objections raised of the customer, had to be revised as, by then, the successor 'goods and service tax (GST)' had come into force. For issue of fresh invoice after 1st July 2017, the new tax was discharged on consideration due from customer for service rendered during the 'erstwhile tax' regime. The claim, for refund of tax paid at the first instance under Finance Act, 1994, was rejected by the original authority on the ground of collection having been in accordance with law and, therefore, not liable to be refunded under section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. Order [Order-in-Appeal No. NGP/E....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ws relied upon by the appellant cited supra are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case and are distinguishable. In view of my discussion above, I am of the considered view that there is no infirmity in the impugned order which is upheld by dismissing the appeal of the appellant." xxxxxx 11. In view of the undisputed facts that the appellant has paid the service tax and also the GST; and the Commissioner of Central Excise has held that appellant was not liable to pay GST, rejection of applications for refund is untenable. Having paid the service tax in the year 2017 and having submitted its application, the appellant is awaiting the refund from March 2018 till date. 12. In view of the abo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the Tribunal, in Maharashtra Ex-Servicemen Corporation Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Pune - I, in order [final order no. A/85397/2022 dated 21st April 2022] disposing off appeal [service tax appeal no. 85643 of 2019] against order [order-in-appeal no. PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-404/18-19 dated 2nd November 2018] of Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Pune. 5. The limited issue to be resolved in this dispute is entitlement of the appellant to claim refund of service tax for the period that was liable to be discharged for rendering of 'taxable service' prior to 1st July 2017 when the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 was made effective. It is common ground that tax has been paid twice and it is settled law, as enunciated in the deci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....statute did not deal with credit not taken but only with accumulated, untransitioned credit and, with Point of Taxation Rules, 2011 not allowing any scope for overlap of two taxes, absence of parallel incorporation in the predecessor law to save consequence of credit not taken, precludes exercise of authority under section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. 7. One of the two deposits has to be refunded in accordance with the judicial determination of bar on 'double taxation' and under the relevant statutory empowerment. This Tribunal is not vested with powers under successor tax statute to allow credit which is a precursor to grant of refund under transitional provision of the new law while lower authorities are statutorily empowered to ex....