Page 225 - GSTL_30th April 2020_Vol 35_Part 5

2020 ] SUBJECT INDEX 695
Refund/Refund Claim (Contd.)
of any tax - No legal mandate existing to direct tax authority to act
beyond statutory powers binding on them - Section 11B of Central Excise
Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide Sections 83 of Finance Act,
1994 — Tanna Electric Co. v. Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai Central (Tri. - Mumbai) .... 129
— Rejection of - Payment of Service Tax under mistake of law - Impugned
order rejecting refund claim for Service Tax paid on transaction of
purchase of constructed area along with goods apart from undivided
share of land on the basis of decision of Delhi High Court in G.D.
Builders [2013 (32) S.T.R. 673 (Del.)] - Said decision overruled by
Supreme Court in Larsen and Toubro Limited [2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.)]
specifically - Hence, impugned ground of rejection of claim, cannot be
accepted - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service
Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 — Vasudha Bommireddy v. Assistant
Commr. of S.T., Hyderabad (Telangana) ........................... 52
— Service Tax paid on input service used in output service which is
exported - Development of Math Item Clones, a kind of software
outsourced and used in final package software which are exported -
Further, Psychological professional service obtained to reduce attrition
ratio in employees for their overall performance in development of
software which are exported - Since both services directly used in
development of software which is exported, assessee entitled to refund of
Service Tax paid thereon - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as
applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 5
of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 — White Pearl Web LLP v. Commissioner of Service
Tax, Ahmedabad (Tri. - Ahmd.) .............................. 206
— Service Tax paid under mistake of law - Rejection of claim for non-
furnishing of any document to prove actual deposit of said Service Tax
amount with Central Government - HELD : Petitioner were never asked
to produce such material - Service Tax registration number of vendor
provided by petitioner - Nothing prevented Department from verifying
whether payment made on 19-6-2014, passed on by vendor to Central
Government by verifying Service Tax Returns filed by vendor - Also,
proof of payment of Service Tax by vendor collected from petitioner to
Central Government, in relation to property sold filed with writ petition -
Therefore, said ground in impugned order also cannot be accepted -
Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide
Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 — Vasudha Bommireddy v. Assistant Commr. of
S.T., Hyderabad (Telangana) ................................ 52
— Unjust enrichment - Original authority verified books of account and all
documents relating to building contracts to arrive at finding that assessee
collected Service Tax from its clients - Categorical finding by
Commissioner (Appeals) that incidence of Service Tax passed on to
service recipient - No infirmity in order - Section 11B of Central Excise
Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994
— E.M. Mani Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of C. T. & C. Ex., Cochin (Tri. - Bang.) .... 200
Registration cancellation under GST for default in filing returns, scope of -
See under INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE ................... 8
GST LAW TIMES  30th April 2020  225