2026 (1) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sing balance of Cenvat Credit of service tax of Rs.0/-. Subsequently, the appellant revised ST-3 Return filed on 19.09.2017 showing the closing balance of Rs.2,61,589/-. After filing of revised return, closing balance of credit has been increased by Rs.2,61,589/- and as per the provisions of Section 142(9)(b) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [CGST Act], the appellant filed the refund claim of Rs.2,61,589/-. The appellant once again revised ST-3 Return on 16.11.2020 with outstanding amount of Rs.2,94,188/- claiming that the amount of Rs.32,599/- was left to be included in the outstanding balance of credit. The appellant carried forward the amount of Rs.32,599/- in TRANS-1 in December 2017 but did not carry forward the amount of Rs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner of Central Tax-CESTAT Final Order dated 04.05.2022   (3) Punjab National Bank Vs. CST, Bangalore-CESTAT Final Order dated 07.07.2021   (4) Ge Power Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, ST, Ahmedabad-Final Order NO.A/12438/2024 dated 18.10.2024   (5) Lupin Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of GST & Central Tax,Aurangabad-Final Order No.A/85393/2024 dated 09.09.2024   4. Per contra, Shri Rohit Issar, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue emphasised on the mismatch of the documents. He submitted that the details in supporting documents and the information furnished in the statutory ST-3 Returns by the appellant did not tally with each other. In the ST-3 Returns, the appellants have tak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rved that if two options are available, the assessee may choose, which is more beneficial for them and, therefore, did not find any error where the appellant did not choose to carry forward the credit in TRANS-1 and preferred to claim cash refund as provided under Section 142(9)(b) of the Act. 7. Now, I may consider the discrepancy pointed out by the Department with reference to the supporting documents submitted by the appellant as against the ST-3 return. It is an admitted position that in the ST-3 Return, the CENVAT Credit accrued on account of inputs even in the revised returns filed on 19.09.2017, the supporting documents relates to credit of service tax paid on audit fee/input service. In the earlier case of the appellant disposed ....