9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the normal period Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and further delay of 21 days is condonable under the provisions of sub section (4) of Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The appellant in his contention has stated that the provisions for levy of interest u/s 50 of CGST Act has been amended retrospectively vide section 112 of Finance Act, 2021 to provide that the interest on tax shall be payable on net tax liability paid by Electronic Cash Ledger and provisions of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2021 have been notified to come into force from 01.06.2021 vide Notification No.16/2021-Central Tax dated 01.06.2021. Hence, there is no room left for controversy and the appellant is undoubtedly entitled for refund of interest paid in excess of interest on net tax liability. The appellant was required to pay interest on tax liability paid through Electronic Cash Ledger. However, the appellant before issuance of such instructions and amended provisions to Section 50(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 paid interest on account of delayed payment of tax through Electronic Credit Ledger and Electronic Cash Ledger ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06 vide reference No.ZQ0811200030990 dated 03.11.2020. Further, the appellant was unable to download the order dated 03.11.2020 due to unexceptional error. Therefore, a copy of the said Order dated 03.11.2020 was received on 24.11.2020 from the jurisdictional adjudicating authority. 3. Being aggrieved with the impugned Order No.ZQ0811200030990 dated 03.11:2020, the appellant has filed this appeal on 23.02.2021 on the following grounds which are summarized as under:- 3.1 That the appellant is a proprietorship firm, engaged in manufacturing and exports of goods. Due to global recession and sluggish demand the business of the appellant has been adversely hit in last 2-3 years. Due to stagnant business and instability in the taxation laws (especially Goods and Services Tax) the new employee(s) were unable to handle proper compliances. The accounting records were though made properly but timely tax return filing could not be made due to lack of understanding on part of the new employees. That due to non-filing of returns, the tax refunds in respect of exports could also not be filed and the registration of the appellant was also suo-motto cancelled under Section 29 of the CGST Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already paid interest. That when the government had made it clear by issuing instruction, there is no point to alleged that appellant has filed wrong refund claim as appellant has followed all the principles related to the provisions of law, since it has paid interest as required by jurisdictional authority at the time of cancellation of registration already and waited for the governments directions of payment of interest on net cash liability. The appellant has filed refund in FORM RFD-01 in relation to interest paid on tax paid through ITC for the period July-2017 to March-2018 (2017-18), by following the directions issued by government, that there is nothing wrong in filing of refund, since the same is filed within the provisions of law. 3.5 That the appellant has filed refund purely on the basis of administrative instructions issued by GST Policy wing and a retrospective amendment to section 50 of the CGST Act 2017 passed by Finance Bill, 2021 and since no restrictions on claiming of refund is mentioned herein there, appellant has interpreted its view ' correctly and filed refund, and if it is assumed according to the legal provisions, it is very clear that governments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge of Appellate Authority, before deciding the appeal I am inclined to give an opportunity for personal hearing to the appellant. Therefore, personal hearing was held on 05.10.2021 through virtual mode, wherein Ms. Shuchi Sethi, CA/Authorized Representative of the appellant appeared for personal hearing. During the course of hearing she explained the case in detail and reiterated the grounds of appeal and requested to decide the case on merits. 6. I have gone through the facts of the case and the written submissions made by the appellant in their appeal memos as well as oral submission at the time of personal hearing. I find that the main issues to be decided in the instant cases are (i) whether the appeal has been filed within the prescribed time- limit and (ii) whether or not the appeal filed against the refund rejection order to be decided are proper? 7. First of all, I take up the issue of filing the appeal and before deciding the issue of filing the appeal on merits, it is imperative that the statutory provisions be gone through, which are reproduced, below: SECTION 107. Appeals to Appellate Authority. - (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in reference to late filing of returns, through DRC-03 filed on 01.03.2020 for the period 2017-18 that the appellant had paid interest in excess of interest on the tax liability paid in cash/net tax liability. Further, I observe that department issued a notice in Form of GST-RFD-08 to the appellant, wherein it has been mentioned that the refund of ₹ 4265/- filed under section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 is inadmissible for sanction, since as per the administrative instructions for recovery of interest on net cash tax liability issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs vide F. No. CBEC- 20/01/08/2019-GST dated: 18.09.2020 - it has been clearly mentioned that net cash tax liability to be recovered w.e.f 01.07.2017. No instructions for refund of interest already paid on ITC mentioned herein there and the appellant was directed to appear before the adjudicating authority on 16.10.2020. In response to the notice of the department the appellant filed his reply in Form GST RFD-09 on 27.10.2020. I observed that the adjudicating authority has issued the order in original in Form GST RFD-06 on 03.11.2020 wherein entire refund claim was rejected with remarks Refund cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e payable on that portion of the tax which is paid by debiting the electronic cash ledger. . I find that the provisions for levy of interest under Section 50(1) of the CGST Act 2017 have been amended retrospectively w.e.f. 01.07.2017 under clause 112 of the Finance Act, 2021 (13 of 2021). And said amended provisions to Section 50 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 have been notified to come into force from 01.06.2021 vide Notification No.16/2021-Central Tax dated 01.06.2021. It shall be deemed to have been substituted with effect from the 1st day of July, 2017. 11. In view of the stated provisions, the appellant was required to pay interest on tax liability paid through Electronic Cash Ledger. However, the appellant before issuance of such instructions and amended provisions to Section 50(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 paid interest on account of delayed payment of tax through Electronic Credit Ledger and Electronic Cash Ledger for the period July-2017 to March-2018 (2017-18). Further, I find that the appellant's case does not fall under exclusion clause of proviso to Section 50(1) of the Act. Therefore, in consideration of the amended provisions to Section 50(1) of the Act I am of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
