2025-VIL-2005-CESTAT-DEL-CE
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-2005-CESTAT-DEL-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise – Larger Bench - Refund of Cenvat Credit of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess, Scope and applicability of Sections 140 and 142(3) of CGST Act 2017 - Whether the appellant is eligible for refund of the accumulated balances of Education Cess, Secondary & Higher Education Cess, and Krishi Kalyan Cess under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act – HELD - The provisions of Section 140 of the CGST Act and the corresponding Explanations clearly excluded the Education Cess, Secondary & Higher Education Cess, and Krishi Kalyan Cess from the ambit of "eligible duties and taxes" that could be transitioned to the GST regime - The decisions in Eicher Motors and Slovak India Trading, relied upon by the appellant, is distinguishable on the ground that those cases dealt with a different scenario where the credit was not allowed to be utilized, whereas in the present case, the cesses were specifically excluded from the definition of "eligible duties and taxes" under the CGST Act. On the other hand, the decisions in Cellular Operators Association and Banswara Syntex to be more relevant, which had held that there was no provision under the earlier law to either merge the blocked cesses with Excise Duty/Service Tax or to claim refund of the same – Further, the decision of the Madras High Court in Sutherland Global Services is the most comprehensive and applicable to the present case, wherein it was held that the cesses had effectively become "dead Cenvat Credit" on the dates of their abolition, and therefore, the question of refunding the same would not arise. When the refund is not eligible ab initio, the question of granting them under the provisions of CGST Act 2017 cannot arise - Appellants are not eligible for the refund of the accumulated balances of Education Cess, Secondary & Higher Education Cess, and Krishi Kalyan Cess under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act - Whether the refund claim filed by the appellant KEI is hit by the time limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – HELD - The cesses were blocked on March 1, 2015 and June 1, 2015, and the appellant should have filed the refund claim within one year from these dates, as per the provisions of Section 11B of the CEA, 1944 prevailing at that time. The appellant had quietly transitioned the cesses to TRAN-1 on July 1, 2017, and only after the Revenue pointed out the error, they reversed the same and filed the refund claim on October 11, 2021, which is clearly time-barred - The appellant cannot take recourse to the new regime's law (Section 142(3) of the CGST Act) to claim immunity from the time-bar, as they did not utilize the normal avenue within the framework of the earlier law - The refund claim filed by the appellant is hopelessly time-barred.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C of FY24-25
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?