M/S. Schwing Stetter (India) Pvt. Ltd vs Cce, Ltu, Chennai on 5 May, 2016
4. Garima Associates Vs. CCE, Chandrapur
2015 (40) STR 247 (Tri.-Mum.)
He submits that in the case of Garima associates (supra), it has been held that intention of the Rule is very clear that whatsoever excess amount was paid in advance, the same should be adjusted against forth coming tax liability and if it is not allowed it will amount that Government will be unujustly enriched with excess amount which cannot be the intention of the statute. Merely for non-observance of the procedure laid down in the rule, cannot be made a reason for denial of adjustment and non-allowance of the adjustment in subsequent tax liability of service tax.