Refund of Service Tax paid under RCM allowed post implementation of GST


Quick Summary
The CESTAT, Mumbai has ruled that refunds of service tax paid under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) are permissible even after the implementation of GST. The tribunal found that transitional provisions under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act mean that claims for CENVAT credit refunds should be processed under the previous law. This decision allows the appellant to claim their rightful refund, overturning the previous rejection by tax authorities.

Court :
CESTAT Mumbai

Brief :
In NSSL (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, CGST & CE, Nagpur [FINAL ORDER NOS. A/86639-86640/2021 dated August 03, 2021], NSSL (P.) Ltd. ("the Appellant) has filed the current appeal being aggrieved against Order-in-Appeal dated November 14, 2018("OIA") which rejected the refund applications made by the Appellant for claiming of refund of service tax paid under Reverse Charge Mechanism ("RCM"). The ground provided by the Service Tax Authorities for rejecting the refund application was that Input Tax Credit ("ITC") can only be claimed under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act").

Citation :
FINAL ORDER NOS. A/86639-86640/2021 dated August 03, 2021

In NSSL (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, CGST & CE, Nagpur [FINAL ORDER NOS. A/86639-86640/2021 dated August 03, 2021], NSSL (P.) Ltd. ("the Appellant) has filed the current appeal being aggrieved against Order-in-Appeal dated November 14, 2018("OIA") which rejected the refund applications made by the Appellant for claiming of refund of service tax paid under Reverse Charge Mechanism ("RCM"). The ground provided by the Service Tax Authorities for rejecting the refund application was that Input Tax Credit ("ITC") can only be claimed under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act").

The Appellant failing to pay its Service Tax Liability under RCM in a stipulated time but shown as liability in the Service tax Return under the Finance Act, 1994, which was repealed and was replaced by the Goods and Services Tax ("GST"). Accordingly, the Authorities rejected the refund application which was filed under Central Value Added Tax Credit Rules, 2004 ("CENVAT Credit Rules") on the ground that the credit can only be claimed under the CGST Act.

The Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the OIA has relied upon Section 142(8)(a) of the CGST Act however, as per the observations of the Hon'ble CESTAT, the matter is to be governed under the provisions of Section 142(3) of the CGST Act which provides for Miscellaneous Transitional Provisions applicable in the current case.

Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, which mentions any claim filed by any person for refund of CENVAT Credit will be disposed of under the provisions of existing law i.e, Central Excise Act, 1944 ("the CE Act"). It implies that an assessee can file an application to claim refund of CENVAT credit and such application would be disposed of in accordance with the CE Act. The Hon'ble CESTAT relying on this provision noted that the "Authorities have not questioned the issue regarding the entitlement of the Appellant to the CENVAT Credit under the erstwhile CENVAT statute."

Further opined that the Appellants should be allowed the benefit of refund of service tax paid by it, thereby, setting aside the OIA and allowing the current appeal.

FAQ :

Yes, the CESTAT has ruled that refunds for service tax paid under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) are allowed post-GST implementation, provided the claim is processed under the relevant pre-GST laws.

The refund applications were initially rejected by the service tax authorities on the grounds that Input Tax Credit (ITC) could only be claimed under the new CGST Act, and that the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 were no longer applicable.

The relevant section is Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, which deals with miscellaneous transitional provisions. This section dictates that claims for refund of CENVAT credit filed before GST implementation should be disposed of under the existing law (Central Excise Act, 1944).

The main argument accepted by the CESTAT was that Section 142(3) of the CGST Act mandates that any claim for refund of CENVAT credit must be disposed of according to the provisions of the law in force before GST, specifically the Central Excise Act, 1944.

No, the CESTAT noted that the authorities had not questioned the appellant's fundamental entitlement to the CENVAT credit under the previous CENVAT statute.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in GST
Views : 242

Comments




CCI Pro