9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce made to Circular No. 135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020 wherein it has been clarified that the refund of accumulated ITC shall be restricted to the ITC as per those invoices, the details of which are uploaded by the supplier in FORM GSTR-1 and are reflected in the FORM GSTR-2A of the applicant. Hence, the refund of accumulated ITC shall not be available to the appellant of those invoices the details of which are not reflected in GSTR-2A of the applicant at the time of filing of refund. In view of the above discussions, mis-match in Net lTC, Inverted rated supply of goods and tax payable on such supplies and adjusted total turnover clearly established and the appellant failed to reconcile the mis-match documentary or otherwise. It is app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, inter alia, impugning an Order-in-Appeal dated 18.11.2021 whereby, the appeals preferred by the petitioner (eight in number) against the eight separate orders, all dated 31.12.2020, passed by the Adjudicating Authority, were rejected. 4. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacturing of Polypropylene Yarn and Polypropylene narrow woven fabric, which is chargeable to Goods and Services Tax (GST) at the rate of 12% and 5% respectively. 5. The petitioner claims that raw materials used for manufacturing of the product (Granules, Master Batch, Spin Finish Oil) are chargeable to GST at the rate of 18%. The petitioner, thus, claims that due to the inverted tax structure, it is unable to avail the entire credit of input tax paid by it on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 18.11.2021 essentially on two grounds. First, that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to be heard by the Adjudicating Authority and thus, the refund rejection orders were required to be set aside. Second that the petitioner had furnished the reconciliation statement scaling down its claims for refund, yet the same were rejected on the ground that there was a mismatch in the returns filed. 10. A plain reading of the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 18.11.2021 indicates that the petitioner s applications for refund were rejected on the ground that the petitioner had changed the value of the inverted rated supply of goods substantially. The relevant extract of the impugned Order in Appeal dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in it has been clarified that the refund of accumulated ITC shall be restricted to the ITC as per those invoices, the details of which are uploaded by the supplier in FORM GSTR-1 and are reflected in the FORM GSTR-2A of the applicant. Hence, I am of the view that the refund of accumulated ITC shall not be available to the appellant of those invoices the details of which are not reflected in GSTR-2A of the applicant at the time of filing of refund. In view of the above discussions, mis-match in Net lTC, Inverted rated supply of goods and tax payable on such supplies and adjusted total turnover clearly established and the appellant failed to reconcile the mis-match documentary or otherwise. 11. It is apparent from the above that although ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
