Section 142 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Refund of Cenvat Credit - The petitioner prayed for quashing the order in Appeal dated 03.2.2020 passed by the appellate authority; for setting aside the order in Original dated 25.1.2019 and for a relief of refund of CENVAT Credit of the aforesaid amount of input service credit in terms of transitional provision under Section 142(3) of Act, 2017.The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of Section 142 (3) of the Act have not been properly considered. The CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on port service earned lawfully under the existing laws which is a substantive benefit conferred by and earned under the existing law. The respondent has erred in law while holding that there is no provision of law granting refund of tax paid on input services under Section 11 B of Central Excise Act. The court observed that the petitioner has claimed the credit of service tax paid on port services as input service, though they were not entitled to claim such a credit. In this case the bill was generated on 23.05.2017, services availed and bill amount including service tax was paid in April 2017 but the original bill did not reach the petitioner for unknown/undisclosed reasons. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the circumstances of acts and omissions of the service provider (port authority) or the service recipient (the petitioner) who have failed to comply the provision of law, both under the existing law and also under the CGST Act. The entire problem cropped up due to non-receipt of the invoice in original from the port authorities although the port services were availed and payments for the same were made in the month of April 2017. The petitioner never had a right to claim refund under the existing law and had failed to exercise their right to claim CENVAT Credit as per law and wrongly claimed the impugned amount as credit in Service Tax Return.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the writ petition.