GST
TRT-2025-
Cestat Mumbai
Date:-08-03-23
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order Date – 08 March 2023
Parties: M/s. Warburg Pincus India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Asstt. Commissioner, Mumbai South
Facts –
- The Appellant, M/s. Warburg Pincus India Pvt. Ltd., providing "Banking and other financial services". They filed two refund claims for the period April 2005 to Dec. 2005 and for the period from January 2006 to September 2006.
- The refund claims were partly rejected on the ground that credit is not reflected in the ST-3 return.
Issue –
- Whether the appellant is entitled to refund of cenvat credit?
Order –
- The Tribunal observed that as per (D) ENCLOSURES:- (iv) of Form ‘A’, appended to Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.03.2006 it is evident that ST-3 return has not been mentioned as the document relevant for the purpose of considering the admissibility of the credit and the refund. Thus, appellant could have produced any of the record as above to claim the refund of CENVAT Credit as per Rule 5.
- It was also held in the case of Broadcom Research Pvt. Ltd. [2016 (42) STR 79 (Tri. Bang.)] affirmed at [2016 (43) STR 321 (Kar.)] that on the ground that the figures in ST-3 returns were not correct or there was a substantial difference, refund claim cannot be rejected.
- Thus, refund claim could not have been denied for this reason. It is stated/ unstated policy which govern the exports of goods or services across the globe that the local taxes should not be exported along with the goods or services exported.
- The appeal is allowed.
Download Case Law
