Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

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