Kunal Kumar Tiwari @ Kunal Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 21 August, 2017
21. So far as the judgment passed in the case of Kunal
Kumar Tiwari vs State of Bihar (supra) is concerned, the
same has been relied upon by the petitioner to submit that
an interpretation which advances the purpose of object
underlying the Act should be preferred. But the learned
counsel for the petitioner has failed to show as to how the
entitlements to CENVAT Credit on service tax paid on "port
services" which the petitioner did not claim as per procedure
prescribed by law can be construed to confer such a right to
claim such credit under transitional provisions followed by
cash refund and how such a position in law would advance
the purpose and object of CGST Act. Rather, the aforesaid
interpretation sought to be given by the petitioner is
contrary to the very object and purpose of section 142(3) of
CGST Act which has been discussed at a later part of the
Judgement.