9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 1648 - Commissioner - GSTRefund of IGST - input/input service - non-consideration of invoices submitted by the appellant on which IGST has been paid - rejection of refund in respect of such invoices on the ground that IGST refund was not admissible under CGST or UTGST head - HELD THAT - The appellant has correctly shown the amount of credit of Rs. 1, 15, 167/- under the head of IGST in the Statement of Invoices . It was only due to technical error that the said amount could not be entered under the head of IGST in Form GSTR-11. The Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of VSG Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CC 2019 (5) TMI 85 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has held that - refund cannot be denied on account of Technical Glitches-Petitioner cannot be made helpless just because the computer system does not enable them to refund the IGST amount. Being an undisputed fact that IGST refund is payable to the petitioner the petitioner is absolutely entitled to the IGST refund from the department - Similarly in the case of M/s. Continental India Private Limited Others v. Union of India 2018 (1) TMI 1245 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT the Hon ble Allahabad High Court held that - Department cannot deny the transitional credit when the registered taxable person was unable to file the Form GST TRAN-01 due to technical issues. In the instant case also the appellant being a UIN entity is eligible for refund of IGST CGST and UTGST paid on inward supply of goods or services in terms of Notification No. 16/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 as amended. The appeal of the appellant in respect of IGST refund of Rs. 1, 15, 167/- is allowed.
Issues:
Refund claim of IGST paid on input/input service rejected by adjudicating authority. Appellant filed appeal against the order citing technical error in entering IGST amount, non-consideration of submitted invoices, and arbitrary rejection of refund without merit assessment. Analysis: 1. Refund Claim and Rejection: The appellant, a UIN entity, filed a refund claim of Rs. 18,05,340 for CGST and SGST/UTGST for the quarter July-September 2017. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the refund for CGST and SGST/UTGST but rejected the IGST refund claim of Rs. 1,15,167 as the appellant did not claim it in their refund application. 2. Appellant's Grounds for Appeal: The appellant contended that due to a technical error, they could not enter the IGST amount separately and claimed it under CGST and UTGST. They argued that the adjudicating authority did not consider the invoices submitted by them, as per various Board Circulars, and the refund rejection was arbitrary without a proper assessment of the case. 3. Analysis of Technical Error: The appellant submitted that they correctly declared the IGST amount in the 'Statement of Invoices' but could not enter it separately in Form GSTR-11 due to a technical glitch. They provided invoices showing IGST payments, supporting their claim for the IGST refund. 4. Legal Precedents and Decision: The Additional Commissioner analyzed the case, referring to legal precedents. Citing the Madras High Court case and Allahabad High Court case, it was held that technical glitches should not hinder legitimate refunds. As the appellant correctly mentioned the IGST amount in the 'Statement of Invoices' and due to being a UIN entity eligible for IGST refunds, the Additional Commissioner allowed the appeal for the IGST refund of Rs. 1,15,167. 5. Final Order: Considering the technical error and the appellant's compliance with the refund procedures, the appeal was allowed, and the IGST refund of Rs. 1,15,167 was sanctioned to the appellant. The order disposed of the appeal accordingly. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented by the parties, legal interpretations, and the final decision rendered by the Commissioner of GST (Appeals) in Chandigarh.
|
