Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 229 on proposed change in formula for refund of inverted duty structure

GST Update No 229 on proposed change in formula for refund of inverted duty structure
A new concept of granting refund where accumulation of credit is on account of rate of tax on inputs being higher than the rate of tax on output was introduced in GST law with a view to provide relief to the sectors covered under inverted duty structure. However, there has been ambiguity as regards refund claim since inception as regards the formula is concerned and the fact that input services and capital goods are not considered while computing the refund claim under this mechanism. Moreover, the Supreme Court decision in the case of V.K.C. FOOTSTEPS INDIA PVT. LTD. has added fuel to the fire of litigation by holding that the formula prescribed for the computation of refund claim is faulty as it seeks to discriminate amongst the assessees having credit of inputs in their electronic credit ledger as compared to those having credit of input and input services both in their electronic credit ledger. The Apex Court had mentioned in the order that the GST Council should consider revising the formula of computation of refund of accumulated credit under the inverted duty structure. The recently held 47th GST Council meeting has proposed amendment in the said formula which is the subject matter of discussion of our present update. 
 
The hon’ble Supreme Court stated in its order that a possible solution for removing the anomaly in the formula can be that the Rule itself provides for a statutory assumption or a deeming fiction of utilisation of certain percentage of ITC on input services towards the payment of output tax for the purpose of calculation of refund. Our GST update no. ………. on analysis of the SC decision may be referred for the sake of better understanding. It appears that the GST Council has accepted the suggestion put forth by the Supreme Court and has proposed the following amendment in the recently held GST Council Meeting:-
 
Amendment in formula prescribed in sub-rule (5) of rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017 for calculation of refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit on account of inverted rated structure
a. Change in formula for calculation of refund under rule 89(5) to take into account utilization of ITC on account of inputs and input services for payment of output tax on inverted rated supplies in the same ratio in which ITC has been availed on inputs and input services during the said tax period. This would help those taxpayers who are availing ITC on input services also.
 
Although, the notification proposing the amendment has not been released till date but an attempt is being made to explain the change that has been proposed to be implemented in the formula. To have an in-depth clarity, the amendment can be understood with the help of following example:
 
Details of Outward Supplies:
S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.)
1. Turnover of inverted duty structure 500 Lakhs
2. GST @ 5% 25 Lakhs
3. Turnover of other supply 700 Lakhs
4. GST @ 28% 196 Lakhs
5. Total Adjusted Turnover 1200 Lakhs
 
Details of Inward Supplies:
S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.)
1. 12% inputs 12 Lakhs
2. 28% inputs 56 Lakhs
3. Input Services 18 Lakhs
4. Capital Goods @28% 14 Lakhs
 
Refund as per Existing Formula:
Maximum Refund Amount= {(Turnover of inverted rated supply of goods and services) x Net ITC / Adjusted Total Turnover} - tax payable on such inverted rated supply of goods and services.
Net ITC would comprise of 12% inputs and 28% inputs because input services and capital goods are not eligible for consideration in the formula.
Therefore, refund amount shall be = (500/1200 * 68) - 25= 3.33 Lakhs
 
Considering the present situation, refund amounting to Rs. 3.33 Lakhs shall be granted to the taxpayers subject to the balance available in the electronic credit ledger. However, in case proposed formula is taken into consideration, following shall be calculation of refund amount:
The ratio of input and input services for payment of output tax is 68:86.
Therefore, maximum Refund Amt = (500/1200*68) – (25 * 68/86) = 8.56 Lakhs
 
From the above computation, it is crystal clear that refund sanctioned in the old formula is Rs. 3.33 Lakhs, which is lesser as compared to the amended formula being Rs. 8.56 Lakhs; which is a welcoming initiative from the government.
It is pertinent to mention here that the recent decision taken by the GST Council in the 47th meeting convened on 28th and 29th June as regards to change in formula for calculation of refund is a ray of hope for the taxpayers wherein the taxpayers will get more refund as compared to earlier designed formula. However, the next question prevailing in the minds of taxpayers will be whether the proposed change shall be applicable retrospectively or prospectively. Let’s wait for the notification to be issued in this case so that more clarity can be obtained by the taxpayers.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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