9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nexure-B1. iii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the refund rejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period April 2018 dated 08.10.2020 herein marked as Annexure - B2. iv) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the refund rejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period May 2018 dated 20.10.2020 herein marked as Annexure - B3. v) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the refund rejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period June 2018 dated 20.10.2020 herein marked as Annexure - B4. vi) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the refund rejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period August 2018 dated 20.10.2020 herein marked as Annexure B5. vii) Issue a w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on account of Income Tax Credit (ITC) accumulated due to inverted tax structure for the period from March, 2018 to July, 2019, pursuant to which, the respondent No.2 issued Notices in Form RFD-08, to which, the petitioner submitted replies and the same culminated in the impugned refund rejection orders at Annexure-B1 to Annexure-B9 during the period 23.05.2020 to 13.11.2020 passed by the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred appeals before the 1st respondent, who proceeded to pass the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 15.12.2022 dismissing the appeals filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent and 1st respondent, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 5. The details of the refund claimed by the petitioner for the aforesaid various tax periods are as under: Tax Period Amount in INR. March 2018 2,86,32,646 April 2018 3,17,83,628 May 2018 73,65,048 June 2018 4,06,75,767 August 2018 1,41,76,878 September 2018 2,62,68,982 October 2018 2,15,99,398 January 2019 1,69,01,695 July 2019 1,48,15,223 Total 20,22,19,625 6. Before adverting to the rival submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Finance Act, 1994 would show that the five taxable services to in the charging Section 65 (105) would refer only to service contracts simpliciter and not to composite works contracts. This is clear from the very language of Section 65 (105) which defines " taxable service" as "any service provided". All the services referred to in the said sub-clauses are service contracts simpliciter without any other element in them, such as for example, a service contract which is a commissioning and installation, or erection, commissioning and installation contract. Further, under Section 67, as has been pointed out above, the values of a taxable service is the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service rendered by him. This would unmistakably show that what is referred to in the charging provision is the taxation of service contracts simpliciter and not composite works contracts, such as are contained on the facts of the present cases. It will also be noticed that no attempt to remove the non-service elements from the composite works contracts has been made by any of the aforesaid Sections by deducting from the gross value of the works contract the value of property in goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n No. 11/2017 dated 28.06.2017, which included works contract relating to Metro and even the said Notification No. 20/2017 was subsequently substituted vide Notification No. 1/2018 dated 25.01.2018 by including works contract relating to Metro; it is therefore clear that in the light of the undisputed fact that the refund claims of the petitioner related to the period from March 2018 onwards, it was the Notification No. 1/2018 which was applicable and the same undisputedly including works contract relating to Metro also and since the aforesaid Notification No. 20/2017 dated 22.08.2017 ceased to exist from 25.01.2018 upon its substitution by Notification No. 1/2018 dated 25.08.2018, the petitioner was entitled to claim refund for the subject period from March, 2018 to July, 2019 and consequently, the impugned orders passed by the respondents deserve to be set aside and the refund claim of the petitioner deserves to be allowed on this ground also. 13. During the pendency of the present petition, the revenue issued a Notification No. 15/2023-Union Territory Tax (Rate) dated 19-10-2023 w.e.f. 20-10-2023, thereby substituting the aforesaid Notification No. 15/2017 dated 28.06.2017; the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estate sector and not to other construction or works contract services. In the light of this subsequent event also that has transpired / occurred during the pendency of the present petition, the impugned orders deserve to be quashed and the refund claim of the petitioner deserves to be allowed. 15. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned orders passed by the respondents deserve to be set aside and the refund claim of the petitioner deserves to be allowed with a direction to the respondents to make the refund together with applicable interest within a stipulated timeframe. 16. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 15.12.2022 passed by the 1st respondent is hereby quashed. (iii) The impugned orders at Annexure-B1 dated 08.10.2020, Annexure-B2 dated 08.10.2020, Annexure-B3 dated 20.10.2020, Annexure-B4 dated 20.10.2020, Annexure-B5 dated 20.10.2020, Annexure-B6 dated 02.11.2020, Annexure-B7 dated 02.11.2020, Annexure-B8 dated 26.02.2021 and Annexure-B9 dated 13.11.2021 are hereby quashed. (iv) The respondents are directed to consider the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
