Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (12) TMI 662

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) of the CGST Act for the relevant period which is defined under Rule 89(4) of the CGST Rules. In the statutory pattern, the electronic ledger is required to be maintained, it was permissible for the petitioner to club the ITC credit available to the petitioner for the prior period. As the credit which was available for the period prior to 1 April 2018 pertained to the financial year 2017-18 the same was certainly available to the petitioner in its electronic ledger in the form of a running account - from the reading of the impugned order, it appears to be quite clear that such aspect of the matter has been overlooked and / or not addressed in so far as to what has been clarified by the department itself, so as to bring the interpretation a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f its refund claim as a provisional refund under Section 54(3) of the CGST Act, of an amount of Rs. 1,17,27,495/-. Soon thereafter, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 26 November 2018 in regard to the rejection of refund to the tune of Rs. 21,690/-. A refund sanction order came to be issued in the petitioner s favour on 6 December 2018 and after scrutiny, a refund of Rs. 1,30,08,858/- was sanctioned, which according to the petitioner, was an appropriate amount. 3. The department, however challenged the order dated 11 October 2018 passed on the petitioner s refund application in an appeal before the Commissioner of CGST, on which the impugned order has been passed directing the petitioner to pay back the refund of an amount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ll be granted as per the following formula Refund Amount = (Turnover of zero-rated supply of goods + Turnover of zero-rated supply of services) x Net ITC Adjusted Total Turnover Where, - (A) Refund amount means the maximum refund that is admissible; (B) Net ITC means input tax credit availed on inputs and input services during the relevant period other than the input tax credit availed for which refund is claimed under sub-rules (4A) or (4B) or both; (C) Turnover of zero-rated supply ― of goods means the value of zero-rated supply of goods made during the relevant period without payment of tax under bond or letter of undertaking or the value which is 1.5 times the value of like goods domestically supplied by the same or, similarly pla .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n question of which the petitioner had claimed credit was the period from 1 April 2018 to July 2019, and in such application the petitioner s electronic ledger had indicated the credit available to the petitioner, even for the financial year 2017-18. Such credit being available, it is the petitioner s contention that the petitioner s refund application was completely in consonance with Rule 89(4) of the CGST Rules. However, the Appellate Authority referring to Circular dated 18 November 2019 (Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST) formed an opinion that it was not permissible for the petitioner to club both the periods i.e. period prior to 1 April 2018 which pertains to financial year 2017-18 and the subsequent period which falls in financial year 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the relevant period which is defined under Rule 89(4) of the CGST Rules. 11. In the statutory pattern, the electronic ledger is required to be maintained, it was permissible for the petitioner to club the ITC credit available to the petitioner for the prior period. As the credit which was available for the period prior to 1 April 2018 pertained to the financial year 2017-18 the same was certainly available to the petitioner in its electronic ledger in the form of a running account. We therefore wonder as to how the Appellate Authority could form a view contrary to Rule 89 and more particularly when the same was clarified by subsequent Circular dated 31st March 2020 and to that effect, the Circular dated 18 November 2019 stood diluted. It .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates