9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ond petition filed by the same petitioner seeking the similar benefit. In the present case, IGST paid by the petitioner was corrected as Rs. 2,01,423.31/- for shipping bill No. 7229240 dated 08.07.2017 and Rs. 2,47,486/- for shipping bill No. 7451382 dated 19.07.2017. However, the refund of IGST paid was rejected due to drawback in Part A taken by the petitioner. This prayer of the petitioner for refund is governed by circular dated 30.06.2017 (Annexure R-1) and circular bearing No.37/2018-Customs dated 09.10.2018 (Annexure R-2) - a perusal of circular No. 37/2018-Customs dated 09.10.2018 (Annexure R-2) issued by the Board makes is clear that for exports affected during the transition period by declaring drawback serial number suffixed with A or C, the exporters have consciously relinquished their IGST/ITC claims. Reference, at this stage, can be made to a judgment passed by the High Court of Kerala in G NXT POWER CORP. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS) , NEW DELHI, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTIOMS, NEW DELHI, COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN AND DEPUT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th regard to those goods was paid. After the goods were exported, as per Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Section 16 of the IGST Act, the petitioner made an application for refund of IGST paid with regard to the export goods. Further, on the request/complaint made by the petitioner, a correction was made in the bills and the amount of IGST paid by it (petitioner) was corrected as Rs. 2,01,423.31/- for shipping bill No. 7229240 dated 08.07.2017 and Rs. 2,47,486/- for shipping bill No. 7451382 dated 19.07.2017. However, the refund of IGST paid was rejected due to drawback in Part A taken by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as per Rule 96 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, claim of the refund can only be withheld on two eventualities, which are as under:- (a). A request has been received from the jurisdictional Commissioner of Central tax, State tax or Union Territory tax to withhold the payment of refund due to the person claiming refund in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (10) or sub-section (11) of Section 54; or (b) the proper officer of Customs determines that the goods were exported in violation of the provisions of the Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hall declare that no refund of integrated goods and services tax paid on export product shall be claimed; 2.3 In terms of Rules 12 and 13 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, the shipping bill itself is treated as claim for drawback in terms of the declarations made on the shipping bill. 2.4 The declarations required in terms of above Notes and Conditions and provisions of the Drawback Rules are made electronically in the EDI. When composite drawback rate was claimed (by declaring suffix A or C with Drawback serial number), exporter was abacus required to tick DBK002 and DBK003 declarations in the shipping bills. In fact, for period 1.7.2017 to 26.7.2017, a manual declaration was also required to be given as the changes made on 26.07.2017 were made applicable for exports made from 01.07.2017 onwards. 2.5 By declaring drawback serial number suffixed with A or C and by making above stated declarations, the exporters consciously relinquished their IGST/ITC claims. 3. It has been noted that exporters had availed the option to take drawback at higher rate in place of IGST refund out of their own Considering the fact that exporters have made aforesa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs EDI System. The said amount was credited in the designated bank account of the petitioner on 09.06.2018. If, the petitioner would have not made any mistake in filing of IGST amount in shipping bills, he might get the total refund automatically on 09.06.2018. After processing the said shipping bills, the petitioner had requested for amendment of shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 in IGST amount column in the shipping bills, which was approved by the competent authority on 04.05.2018. The said shipping bills were processed in the month of August, 2017 and request for amendment was made only in the month of May, 2018. After carrying out the correction, remaining amount of Rs. 1,21,910/- and Rs. 3,97,496/- could not be sanctioned automatically and the same could only be processed using Officers Interface by way of generating supplementary scroll. The petitioner should have approached the concerned section for the supplementary scroll. It was further stated that the IGST refunds were automatically transmitted from GSTN portal to EDI systems and subsequently, the amount is transmitted without any problems to the bank account concerned, if there is no error ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay balance of IGST payable to petitioner within six weeks. It was further observed as under:- 4. The learned standing counsel appearing for respondents does not dispute the fact that the subject transaction in fact is with effect from 01.07.2017, came under Section 16 of IGST Act and are zero-rated. It is also not disputed that the voluntary or erroneous payment of IGST is required to be refunded to petitioner. The objection pointed out by Sri Sreejith is that the petitioner has already drawn or availed the higher rate of duty drawback and therefore, while ordering refund of IGST, the petitioner is required to refund the higher rate of duty drawback already availed by the petitioner with interest. Adv. John Varrghese by way of reply submits that the respondents, if insist upon refund of higher rate of duty drawback by the petitioner with interest, the respondents are also required to pay interest to petitioner from the date on which the petitioner requested for refund of IGST. After hearing the counsel on the adjustment, the Court has suggested refund of IGST after adjusting the higher rate of duty drawback availed by the petitioner without refunding IGST amount. The Counsel have c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
