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

Publish Date: 24 Sep, 2010
Print   |    |  Comment

Johnny and Service Tax Refund [Series-II] - Part 1: 'Invoice'

 

Johnny and Service Tax Refund [Series- II]

Part 1: ‘INVOICE’

 

                                                                        Prepared By: -                       

CA. Pradeep Jain

Mayank Palgauta

 

We have already written one complete series of articles for the refund of service tax to exporters under notification no. 41/2007-ST.  The litigation on the same is still going on. The Government has come up with the new notification no. 17/2009-ST dated 7th July, 2009 to make the scheme simple so that the refund is available to the exporters conveniently. But there is no sign of relief for the exporters. They are still struggling to get the refund from the department. With this second series of the articles, an effort has been made to bring out the misery of exporters. This also brings out the present situation existing in the refund structure mechanism under Service tax. This state of affair also is elaborated with the means of poems and conversation between Johnny (an assessee) and his father.

 

Johnny and Jill went up the hill, to get the refund order
Johnny came back with a lack
And Jill came hopeless after.

 

Today, in the present scenario also, the poor exporter is still facing enormous difficulty in getting refund orders as stated in the lines above. There is no radical change has taken place even after the change of total scheme by the Government. The refund claims are the Right of the exporters but the department is rejecting these claims on various grounds which are of trivial importance. This resulted in frustration and skepticism among exporters as regards the Refund mechanism. The one of the conditions relating to INVOICE on which the department is rejecting the refund claim on various services mentioned in the Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 7th July, 2009 (herein after referred to as said notification) are highlighted here by means of poetic conversation: -

 

Johnny-Johnny!  Yes papa!

Got the refund?

No Papa,

Telling lies?

 No Papa,

What’s the reason?

This papa: -

 

Johnny says:  I went to department to get the refund on various invoices issued by service providers under said notification but department said: -

Johnny-Johnny go away,
Come again another day.
Your refund order has following Flay: -

 

In relation to refund claim filed by the exporters, they require the original invoices. It is told to them that the original invoices are required by various departments. Hence the same cannot be given to you. But the department is saying that it is condition of the notification and it cannot be relaxed. We said that we can show the same to you and you compare the same with Xerox copies given by us to you along with refund claim. Then give the same back to us per bearer. But they did not agree. They say that the condition has been imposed so that the double refund claim is not taken by you on the same invoice. We have told that you can put a seal on these original invoices saying that the refund is claimed, not to be used again. But they did not agree and told that it is condition precedent for claiming the refund that the original invoices should be submitted with us. We were helpless and submitted the original invoices. We were hopeful of getting the refund thereafter. But we were not aware of the fact that we are dealing with revenue department who can collect the crores of rupees but cannot give small refund claim. The second objection was raised by them

 

Johnny-Johnny!  Yes papa!

Got the refund?

No Papa,

Telling lies?

 No Papa,

What’s the reason?

This papa: -

 

Johnny says:  I went to department to get the refund on various invoices issued by service providers under said notification but department said: -

Johnny-Johnny go away,
Come again another day.
Your refund order has following Flay: -

 

All the original Invoices issued by a service providers like Custom House Agent for CHA services or by a Cleaning and Forwarding Agent for cleaning and forwarding services should have certificate as mentioned the notification 17/2009. In this endorsement the assessee has to certify that the services mentioned in the invoices have issued to the assessee; the service tax has been paid thereon by the assessee and said services have been utilized in export of goods under the particular shipping bill no. and its date. We have told them that we have made a rubber stamp of this certificate and put it on Xerox copy of the invoice. But they said that the same should be put on the original invoice. We have told that the original invoice is required by many department and auditors. Hence, we will use them for various purposes after the same is returned to us. But they did not agree and told that the same should be put on the original invoice. We have no option but to agree their demand. After the seal was put on original invoice, we asked for the refund. But the department came with the next arrow. He has told that you have written in rubber stamp the category of service, shipping bill number and date is as per table annexed to refund claim. But the shipping bill number, category of service should be mentioned on the invoice only. We have learnt from past experience that we have no option before the department but to abide by the things as told to us. Hence, we followed their instructions and corrected all the invoices in the hope of service tax refund claim. The assessee submits that the reference of all the Shipping Bills and its date has already given in tabular form with refund claim application. Thus the demand of mentioning the reference of the same in each and every invoice of the service providers has ridiculous point.

  

Johnny says:  I went to the department next day again with the corrections but department rejected saying: -

Johnny-Johnny go away,

You won’t get refund anyway.
It has following more flay: -

The invoices of various service providers have not prepared under Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 as many of invoices are not serially numbered; some invoices do not have the Service tax Registration no. of service providers and some of them are not having the description of service provided during the course of Export of goods. Even the same is not mentioned in the table annexed to the refund claim. Furthermore, the same is not mentioned in certificate endorsed on the face of invoice. We pleaded that when the service provider has not mentioned the above details in his invoices then how we can know the above information like under which category the service provider is providing the services. Further, we argued that since these mistakes have not done on our part, the refund should not be denied on these ridiculous grounds which are beyond the control of the assessee.

 

Unrewarding again & again;

Johnny now in grief and pain!

‘Refund Order’ now a dream;

His efforts have downstream!

 

Johnny’s contention:-

To fulfillment of the condition of submitting ORIGINAL INVOICES to the department, we have produced all the ORIGINAL invoices of all the service providers at the time of refund but these have not come back to the our custody as the department contending that they will keep them for the purpose of refund claim. They contend that even after the refund is sanctioned or rejected then the file will go for audit and the department has to send the original invoices to audit wing or review wing. Thereafter, if the appeal is filed then they will keep the invoices with them.  

 

Seeing these erroneous interruptions, obstacles and arguments taken by the department, the exporter-assessee wants to say one sentence to the Government that “HATHI KE DANTH KHAANE KE AUR, DIKHAANE KE AUR” because on one point the Board is issuing the exemption notifications for promoting the Export of goods outside India and on the other side Revenue department is not happy to sanction the refund claim.

 

At the end all the exporters, whose refund claim is under evolution from extensive time period, raise one question that why the Finance Minister is not exempting the exporters from payment of service tax itself in order to remove these types of silly troubles which became a big barrier thereafter. They require straight forward exemption rather than exemption by way of refund.

 

By this humorous and poetic article above we conclude that the physical condition and mental state of assesses claiming refunds against export of goods is similar to that of Johnny in the poem. Every time the assessee is approaching the department his refund claims are being rejected on some or the other flaws. He has to return fruitless, hopeless with his futile efforts thinking whether he will be getting the refund or not. 

 

There are a number of services on which the refund is allowed. The assessee is facing difficulty in almost all of those services due to attached conditions with each service. Due to the large number of conditions we were not able to cover all the conditions in this article and hence we will be bringing further articles on the different conditions covered therein.

 

Keep visiting for the next article……..

 

*******

 

 

Comments

  • S.L.Bansal on 29 September, 2010 wrote:

    Excellent job. Such type of ineffecient officers should be prosecuted. In fact they are criminal and corrupt officers who do not impliment tghe law in proper spirit. Such type of issues should be raised before the Commisioner,Chief Commisioner who visits our places ,instead of garlending them. S.L.Bansal
  • S.L.Bansal on 29 September, 2010 wrote:

    Excellent job. Such type of ineffecient officers should be prosecuted. In fact they are criminal and corrupt officers who do not impliment tghe law in proper spirit. Such type of issues should be raised before the Commisioner,Chief Commisioner who visits our places ,instead of garlending them. S.L.Bansal

Post a Comment



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