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 on CLARIFICATION ON REFUND RELATED ISSUES

GST Update on CLARIFICATION ON REFUND RELATED ISSUES


CLARIFICATION ON REFUND RELATED ISSUES
Various amendments have been made by the government by issuing several notifications and circulars on 31st day of December, 2018. In this update, we are discussing Circular No. 79/53/2018-GST dated 31st December, 2018 being issued to describe the change in mode of submission of refund claims and clarifications regarding various other issues.
1. Change in mode of submission of refund claims with jurisdictional proper officer-
• Till now taxpayers were required to file FORM GST RFD – 01A on the portal, generate the ARN and submit the documents physically in the office of jurisdictional officer. A modification has been made and all the documents, undertakings, statements required to be submitted along with the refund claim shall be uploaded on the portal at the time of filing of refund application. Further the invoices where the details are not found in GSTR-2A for the relevant period can as well be uploaded electronically at the time of filing of refund claim. The taxpayers still have the option to physically submit the application to the proper jurisdictional officer.
• The ARN shall be issued after the completion of the above process and acknowledgement shall be issued within 15 days from the date of generation of ARN. But the said acknowledgement or deficiency memo shall be issued manually by the tax officer.

2. Calculation of Refund amount for refund claim on account of inverted duty structure.
• The departmental officers were denying refund of ITC on inputs having equal or lower rate of GST as on Outward supply. But this circular has clarified that refund of unutilized ITC in case of inverted duty structure is available where ITC remains unutilized after setting off available ITC for the payment of output tax liability. Where there are multiple inputs attracting different rates of tax, in the formula provided in rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules, the term “Net ITC‟ covers the ITC availed on all inputs in the relevant period, irrespective of their rate of tax. 
• Let’s understand this with the help of an example. Suppose in the manufacture of final Product A (Taxable @ 12%), we use two different inputs say input X (Taxable @ 5%) and input Y (Taxable @ 18%). Product A is sold at Rs. 5,000/- (the output liability shall be Rs. 600[5000*12/100]) and input X is acquired at Rs. 500/- (the credit amount shall be Rs. 25/-[500*5/100]) whereas input Y is purchased for Rs. 3500/- (the credit amount shall be Rs. 630/- [3500*18/100]). 
As per Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017- Maximum Refund Amount = (Turnover of Inverted Rated Supply of Goods and Services* Net ITC / Adjusted total turnover)- Tax payable on such inverted rated supply of goods and services. This equals to = {5000*(25+630)/5000}-600= Rs. 55 which is the maximum refund amount that is sanctionable.

3. Disbursal of refund amounts after sanction
• This circular advices the tax officers to issue the final sanction orders in FORM GST RFD-06 within 45 days of the date of generation of ARN. Section 56 of the CGST Act states that if any tax ordered to be refunded is not refunded within 60 days of the date of receipt of application, interest at the rate of 6 per cent on the refund amount starting from the date immediately after the expiry of sixty days from the date of receipt of application (ARN) till the date of refund of such tax. Therefore, if the refund is not sanctioned within 60 days then the department is liable to pay tax payers interest @ 6%. Interest will be calculated starting from the date immediately after the expiry of sixty days from the date of receipt of the application till the date on which the amount is credited to the bank account of the claimant.

4. Refund applications that have been generated on the portal but not physically received by jurisdictional tax offices
• Prior to the issue of this circular, many refund applications might have been filed on the portal but not submitted manually to the officers. This circular prescribes the procedure to be followed by the officers in such cases. It states that
a) All refund applications in which the amount claimed is less than the statutory limit of Rs. 1,000/- shall be rejected and the amount re-credited to the electronic credit ledger.
b) Where the refund amount in the application is greater than Rs. 1000/- has been claimed, a list of applications which have not been received in the jurisdictional tax office within a period of 60 days starting from the date of generation of ARN may be compiled. A communication may be sent to all such claimants on their registered email ids, informing that the application needs to be physical submitted to the jurisdictional tax office within 15 days of the date of the email. The claimant may be further informed that if he/she fails to physically submit the application within 15 days of the date of the email, the application shall be summarily rejected and the debited amount, shall be re-credited to the electronic credit ledger.

6. ITC on invoices of earlier period availed in the subsequent period (say invoice has been raised in August but goods have been received in September, then the credit is claimed in the month of September) is to be taken into consideration for the calculation of refund of unutilized ITC filed for the subsequent month. In this regard circular clarifies that ITC of invoices issued in earlier period availed in subsequent period cannot be excluded from the calculation of the refund amount for the month of subsequent period.

7. This circular clarifies the term “Inputs” for the purpose of claiming refund under GST regime. Tax Authorities do not consider ITC on stores and spares, packing materials, materials purchased for machinery repairs, printing and stationery items, as part of Net ITC on the grounds that these are not directly consumed in the manufacturing process and therefore, do not qualify as input. It is clarified that ITC of GST paid on inputs shall be available to a person as long as he/she uses or intends to use such inputs for the purposes of his/her business and there is no specific restriction on the availment of such ITC. The GST paid on inward supplies of stores and spares, packing materials etc. shall be available as ITC as long as these inputs are used for the purpose of the business and/or for effecting taxable supplies, including zero-rated supplies, and the ITC for such inputs is not restricted under section 17(5) of the CGST Act. 
8. Refund of tax paid on input services and capital goods is not allowed in the case of refund of input tax credit accumulated on account of inverted duty structure. 
This is solely for the educational purpose.

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