Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 180 on SC decision on rate of interest on delayed refunds

GST Update No 180 on SC decision on rate of interest on delayed refunds
GST law was incorporated with a motive of simplified and easy tax reform in the economy. It was expected that it will bring hassle free refund process. Even the Government has come out with a time frame to sanction the refund at the earliest for easy and efficient business operations. However, it seems that officers of GST department are reluctant as they adopt bureaucratic practice and red tape procedure to grant refunds to the taxpayers. Intentional and continuing delays are often a matter of discussion among the business community as they face liquidity issues. Moreover, the rate of interest in case of delay in payment of taxes by the assessee is 18% whereas the rate of interest for delay in sanction of refunds is 6%/9%. The issue regarding rate of interest to be granted for delayed sanction of refund claim has travelled down the line from Gujarat High Court to the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA V/S M/S WILLOWOOD CHEMICALS PVT. LTD [SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2995-2996 OF 2022]. The decision imparted is the subject matter of discussion of our present update. The respondent contended that they are eligible for refund since as per section 16 of IGST Act, 2017, registered person making exports shall be eligible to claim refund of unutilised ITC or refund of IGST paid on exports. The respondent claimed that they shall be entitled to interest due to delay in receipt of compensation ranging between 94 to 290 days. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: • Modi Industries Ltd V/s Commissioner of Income Tax and Another • Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd • Sandvik Asia Ltd The Counsel of the petitioner opposed the same by placing reliance on the various following decisions • K.T. Plantation Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. V/s State of Karnataka • Sandvik Asia Ltd. V/s Commissioner of Income Tax-I Pune and others and Commissioner of Income Tax • Gujarat V/s Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals. It was argued that the directions of Hon’ble High Court of payment of 9% CA. PRADEEP JAIN ??www.capradeepjain.com??pradeep@capradeepjain.com??4 interest p.a. from date of filing of GSTR-3B is incorrect since as per Section 56 of CGST Act, 2017, the interest rate is 6% p.a. only. The Court held that the departmental officers are having no objection on eligibility of grant of refund of interest but disputes are related to rate of interest to be awarded in such a case i.e. 6% instead of 9% p.a. Provisions of Section 56 of CGST Act, 2017 were carefully examined wherein it is mentioned that interest on refund is to be awarded within a period of 60 days from date of receipt of application along with interest at 6% p.a. If in case, the amount to be refunded arises from any order which is not refunded within a period of 60 days, interest at the rate of 9% p.a. would be applicable as per proviso to Section 56 of CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that the “If the statue specifies interest, it shall be payable as per the terms of the provisions of the same. If the statue bars from payment of interest, in that case no interest shall be awarded. Where statue is silent and there is no bar on awarding interest, delay in paying compensation would require rewarding interest at reasonable rate on equitable grounds.” Quoting the decisions on which reliance is placed by the respondent, the court stated that interest awarded in excess of what is mentioned in statue was only for a period beyond 20 years wherein the matter was not covered in statue and therefore, decided by the Court. However, inordinate delay of 17 years in making refund was accepted at 9% p.a. in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd since there was inordinate delay in granting refund. However, in the present case, it was held that High Court has erred in its approach as there is a delay is of just 94 to 290 days which is not inordinate delay and therefore, interest awarded in such a case shall be only 6% and not 9%. From the above decision, it is crystal the GST provisions as regards grant of interest are having biased approach as the genuine taxpayers have to pay interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on every error and on the contrary, the department just awards interest at the rate of 6% p.a. for delay in sanction of refunds. An earnest need is anticipated at the end of government to bring structural level changes coupled with sincere actions and put an end to imparity and inequality among the taxpayers by lowering down the interest rates payable by them for short payment of taxes or increase the rate CA. PRADEEP JAIN ??www.capradeepjain.com??pradeep@capradeepjain.com??5 of interest for delayed sanction of refund claims.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com