9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d therein. The rates of draw back under column A and B for the product exported by the Petitioner is the same. The said fact is not disputed by the Respondents. It is only on technical ground that affixing suffix A claim of the Petitioner is denied. Respondents shall sanction the refund towards IGST paid in respect of the goods exported i.e. supply made by shipping. Of course, in case, if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw back claimed was the same as the custom component. 3. The learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India 2021(46) G.S.T.L. 31(Guj.). The learned counsel submits that the said judgment has been confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd. 2021(54) G.S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner is not entitled for refund. 5. The Petitioner, it appears, exported the goods to Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) and Mumbai Airport, Mumbai on payment of integrated goods and service tax. Under notification dated 21.09.2017, effective from 01.10.2017, the two different rates in cases where credit is availed and credit not availed i.e. column A and B are done away with and replace ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of draw back under column A and B for the product exported by the Petitioner is the same. The said fact is not disputed by the Respondents. It is only on technical ground that affixing suffix A claim of the Petitioner is denied. The case of the Petitioner is similar to the one decided by Gujarat High Court in the case of Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) and confirmed by the Apex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
