9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 305 - AAR - GSTRequest for withdrawal of Advance Ruling application - Input tax credit - credit in respect of an input (invoice) at any time within the limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) - Held that - The application filed by the Applicant for advance ruling is dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues:
1. Admissibility of input tax credit within the limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. 2. Admissibility of input tax credit in cases of inverted duty structure. 3. Admissibility of refund claim in cases of inverted duty structure. Analysis: Issue 1: Admissibility of input tax credit within the limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) of CGST Act The applicant, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing power driven water pumps, sought clarification on the admissibility of input tax credit (ITC) in relation to invoices received. They highlighted the inverted duty structure issue where the tax on inputs is higher than the tax on output, resulting in an accumulation of excess credit. The applicant argued that ITC availed could be utilized to set off GST liability but continued to accumulate due to the inverted duty structure. They also mentioned the provision under Section 54(3)(ii) of SGST and CGST enabling refund of unutilized ITC in such cases. Issue 2: Admissibility of input tax credit in cases of inverted duty structure The applicant claimed that they could avail ITC on invoices received under GST at any time within the limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. They intended to use the accumulated ITC from the pre-GST regime to discharge current GST liabilities. The applicant sought clarification on the admissibility of ITC in such scenarios and the process to lodge refund claims where permissible. Issue 3: Admissibility of refund claim in cases of inverted duty structure The applicant presented a detailed manufacturing process flowchart and undertook to submit specific invoices and relevant documents to clarify all conditions under Section 16 and Section 17. However, before the final hearing, the applicant requested withdrawal of the Advance Ruling Application, leading to the dismissal of the application by the Authority. In conclusion, the Authority for Advance Ruling, Tamil Nadu dismissed the application as withdrawn based on the applicant's request. The ruling did not delve into the substantive issues raised regarding the admissibility of input tax credit and refund claims in cases of inverted duty structure.
|
