9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also found that in the instant matter there is no doubt about the fact that at the time of filing of refund claim, the appellant neither submitted copy of DRC-03 nor made any debit entry from Electronic Cash Ledger, resulting into rejection of refund claim by the adjudicating authority. Further, the appellant replied vide (RFD-09), dated 27-7-2020 in response to show cause notice (RFD-08), dated 17-7-2020, wherein, they submitted that they have debited ₹ 85,787/- IGST and ₹ 85,787/- in Penalty from their Electronic Cash Ledger and also submitted the copy of Debit Entry No. DC0807200250413, dated 25-7-2020 but the same has not been considered by the adjudicating authority. While filing of refund application, the appellant had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Brief facts of the case :- 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that the appellant has filed refund claim vide ARN No. AA080720016486A, dated 7-7-2020 under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 89 of the CGST Rules, 2017 in consequent to the Appeal Order No. 619, dated 27-1-2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade-II, (Appeal-II) State Tax (SGST) Ghaziabad. 2.2 On examination of refund claim, it was observed that during the transit checking of the vehicle No. RJ-40 GA/2203, the State Tax Authorities, Ghaziabad found some discrepancies in the E-way Bill of the vehicle carrying goods and Vide MOV-09 No. 192080983141138, dated 2-8-2019 ordered to deposit IGST amounting to ₹ 85,787/- as tax and imposed an equal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 020 in response to the SCN dated 17-7-2020 against their refund application and they have debited ₹ 85,787/- in IGST and ₹ 85,787/- in penalty account from their electronic cash ledger and submitted the Debit Entry No. DC0807200250413, dated 25-7-2020. 2.7 Further, the adjudicating authority found that the amount in question has not been deposited in the Govt. exchequer before filing of the refund claim. Accordingly, the adjudicating authority has passed the impugned Order dated 5-8-2020 and rejected the refund claim amounting to ₹ 1,71,574/- under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017. 3. Being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 5-8-2020, the appellant has filed the appeal on 16-11-2020, the delay of 11 days from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the time of personal hearing. I find that the main issue to be decided in the instant case are (i) whether the appeal has been filed within the prescribed time-limit and (ii) whether the appeal filed against the order of rejection of refund claim has to be decided or not? 6. 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 under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er and accordingly, they have made debit entry in GSTN portal through DRC-03 and the same has informed to the department in their reply, to show cause notice (RFD-08) reference No. ZS0807200243996, dated 17-7-2020, vide RFD-09, dated 27-7-2020 and also submitted a copy of cash ledger copy of DRC-03, dated 25-7-2020 to the department. Further, the appellant has submitted that the adjudicating authority has not been examined the issue properly and also without checking all documents submitted by the appellant, the refund claim was rejected. 10. On carefully examination of records, I find that the appellant has filed the refund claim RFD-01 vide ARN No. AA080720016486A, dated 7-7-2020 for refund of IGST ₹ 85,787/- and penalty of equ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
