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 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