9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of the first application. However, the said sub-rule does not contemplate that the date of the fresh application has to be considered for the purposes of determining the period of limitation for filing an application for refund under sub-section (1) of Section 54 of the CGST/SGST Acts - The rejection of the application for refund filed by the petitioner by Ext.P4 communication on the ground that the second application filed by the petitioner was beyond the time specified in subsection (1) of Section 54 of the CGST/SGST Acts cannot be sustained in law. Conclusion - The date of the original refund application should be considered for time limit purposes under Section 54, provided deficiencies are rectified. Rule 90(3) should not rese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner on 05-04-2021 has to be processed on the petitioner curing all defects which have been pointed out in Ext.P1(a). It is submitted that the requirement in Rule 90(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules (CGST Rules) to file a fresh application for refund on deficiencies being intimated is not in tune with the statutory provisions. It is submitted that even if a fresh application has to be filed on a deficiency memo being issued to the petitioner, the date of the application will have to be considered as the date of the original application and the date of the second application cannot be taken into consideration for the purposes of determining whether such an application was filed within time or not. 4. The learned Go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 49, may claim such refund in such form and manner as may be prescribed . Rule 90 of the CGST Rules deals with acknowledgement of an application for refund. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 90 of the CGST Rules no doubt requires the filing of a fresh refund application after rectification of deficiencies pointed out in respect of the first application. However, the said sub-rule does not contemplate that the date of the fresh application has to be considered for the purposes of determining the period of limitation for filing an application for refund under sub-section (1) of Section 54 of the CGST/SGST Acts. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the rejection of the application for refund filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
