2023 (10) TMI 341 - HC - GST

Refund of unutilised Input Tax Credit (ITC) - mismatch in the reported turnover - inverted duty structure or not - petitioner s appeal was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted the copies of the statutory records (GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A) for the relevant period and therefore, the petitioner s claim could not be co-related - HELD THAT - It is not disputed that the petitioner was not asked to furnish the said documents. It is also the petitioner s case that the statutory records were available on its portal with the concerned authorities. It is considered apposite to remand the matter to the appellate authority for consideration afresh. The appellate authority shall issue an appropriate notice calling upon the petitioner to produce all such documents as the appellate authority considers necessary for processing the said claims - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
The petitioner seeks refund of unutilised Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to inverted duty structure. The main issues are mismatch in reported turnover, classification of goods under HSN 6404, rejection of application due to lack of requisite documents, and non-submission of statutory records (GSTR-1, GSTR-3B, GSTR-2A) for the relevant period.

Mismatch in Reported Turnover and Classification of Goods:
The petitioner applied for refund of &8377;2,42,846/- on account of inverted duty structure. The adjudicating authority issued a show cause notice proposing rejection based on reported turnover mismatch and classification of goods under HSN 6404, which were also the petitioner's outward supplies. The application was rejected for not filing requisite documents, despite the petitioner claiming to have attached a soft copy in pdf format.

Rejection Due to Lack of Requisite Documents:
The petitioner's application was rejected for not submitting necessary documents, including statutory records like GSTR-1, GSTR-3B, and GSTR-2A for the relevant period. The petitioner contended that these records were available on its portal with the authorities. The appellate authority upheld the rejection citing non-submission of statutory records necessary to co-relate the refund claim.

Remand and Directions for Reconsideration:
The High Court remanded the matter to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The appellate authority was directed to issue a notice for producing all necessary documents, including statutory returns, within two weeks. The appellate authority was instructed to decide on the appeal within six weeks from the date of the order. Ultimately, the petition was allowed in the specified terms, emphasizing the importance of providing all required documents for the refund claim process.