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 on recent clarification on refund related issues - 006/2020-21

GST Update on recent clarification on refund related issues - 006/2020-21

 

CBIC has issued circular no.135 dated 31.03.2020 wherein Government has issued certain clarifications in respect of refunds related to exports under GST. The summary of the clarifications have been provided below-

1. It has been decided to remove the restriction on clubbing of tax periods across Financial Years. This was decided in 39th GST council meeting and accordingly, circular No. 125/44/2019-GST dated 18.11.2019 is rescinded to the extent i.e. the restriction on bunching of refund claims across financial years shall not apply. We have already informed you in our earlier update about this decision in the GST council meeting.

Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Order dated 21.01.2020, in the case of M/s Pitambra Books Pvt Ltd. has stayed the rigour of paragraph 8 of Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST dated 18.11.2019 in which such restriction was imposed and has also directed the Government to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the tax refund electronically, or to accept the same manually. Hon’ble Delhi High Court has observed that the Circulars can supplant but not supplement the law. Circulars might mitigate rigours of law by granting administrative relief beyond relevant provisions of the statute, however, Central Government is not empowered to withdraw benefits or impose stricter conditions than postulated by the law. This clarification is big relief to all taxpayers because if goods were received in the month of March 2019 and export was made in April 2019, then the taxpayers would apply refund for the period March 2019 to May 2019. Earlier, this was debarred but this clarification removed such restriction.

2. Refund of accumulated input tax credit (ITC) on account of reduction in GST Rate- In case the tax rate on input reduces e.g. From 18% to 12% and due to this reduction, the tax rate on input and output stands same. Then, the taxpayer cannot claim refund of inverted duty tax structure under section 54(3) of the CGST Act, 2017. It is noteworthy that, the input and output being the same in such cases, though attracting different tax rates at different points in time, do not get covered under the provisions of clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of section 54 of the CGST Act.

3. Change in manner of refund of tax paid on supplies other than zero rated supplies- Refund in the following cases –

i. Refund of excess payment of tax;

ii. Refund of tax paid on intra-State supply which is subsequently held to be inter State supply and vice versa;

iii. Refund on account of assessment/provisional assessment/appeal/any other order;

 iv. Refund on account of “any other” ground or reason

shall now be sanctioned in the same proportion in which the cash and credit ledger has been debited for discharging total tax liability. This allows for sanctioning of refund by re credit the electronic credit ledger by the department. This clarification has been given in alignment of the insertion of rule 86(4A) and 92(1A) in the CGST Rules, 2017 vide notification no. 16/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020. It may be noted that the above restriction would not apply to refund of ITC on account of zero rated supplies and deemed exports.

A detailed update on this issue has already being circulated amongst our netizens for more clarifications.

4. Guidelines for refunds of Input Tax Credit under Section 54(3)- It has been decided that the refund of accumulated ITC shall be restricted to the ITC as per those invoices, the details of which are uploaded by the supplier in FORM GSTR-1 and are reflected in the FORM GSTR-2A of the applicant. Accordingly, para 36 of the circular No. 125/44/2019-GST, dated 18.11.2019 stands modified to that extent. This clarification was much required after enactment of Rule 36(4) in the CGST Rules, 2017. It is noteworthy to mention that such restriction has not been imposed in the Act or rules. Circular inconsistent with the Act or Rules is void ab-intio and cannot be implemented. The landmark judgment given in the case of Dhiren Chemicals was reversed in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur v/s M/s Ratan Melting & Wire Industries [2008-TIOL-194-SC-CX-CB]. In this case, it was held that the Board circular will not prevail over the Order of the Supreme Court. It was further held that a circular which is contrary to the statutory provisions has no existence in law. This circular will create a havoc among taxpayers as already refund sanction process takes time and such restrictions will block their working capital for indefinite period. When the Rule 36(4) allows 10% extra credit then how it can be denied in the refund claim and that too by a circular. There should be provision in the Act for the same.

5. New Requirement to mention HSN/SAC in Annexure ‘B’- We are already aware of the fact that HSN wise details of goods and services are not available in FORM GSTR-2A and therefore it becomes very difficult to distinguish ITC on capital goods and/or input services out of total ITC for a relevant tax period. Now the applicant shall be required to mention HSN/SAC code in annexure B which is mentioned on the inward invoices. In cases where supplier is not mandated to mention HSN/SAC code on invoice, the applicant need not mention HSN/SAC code in respect of such an inward supply. Already uploading of refund claim is a very tedious job. We have already highlighted the same in our GST Johnny update. But now requiring further information will be impossible task. Moreover, the distinction of capital goods and inputs cannot be done on the basis of HSN code. One HSN code say bearings 8482 might be capital goods for a manufacturer but it will be input for machine manufacturer. Hence, deciding input and capital goods on the basis of HSN code will be difficult task.

This is solely for educational purpose.

You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/as well as follow us on twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21.

 

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