TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeals for Refund of Input Tax Credit Rejected based on CGST Rules</h1> <h3>M/s Sunil Enterprises Versus The Deputy Commissioner, CGST Division-H, Jaipur</h3> M/s Sunil Enterprises Versus The Deputy Commissioner, CGST Division-H, Jaipur - 2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 530 (Commr. Appl. - GST - Raj.) Issues:1. Appeal against Orders in Original for refund of unutilized ITC.2. Dispute over the method of calculating refund.3. Applicability of Circular on Compensation Cess.4. Eligibility for refund based on Principle of Natural Justice.Analysis:1. The appeals were filed against Orders in Original for refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) by M/s Sunil Enterprises. The adjudicating authority had both sanctioned and rejected parts of the refund claims for the months of March and April 2018.2. The appellant contested the method of calculating the refund, arguing that only the turnover of CESS should be considered as adjusted turnover for refund calculation. However, the Additional Commissioner (Appeals) found that as per Rule 89(4) of the CGST Rules 2017, the turnover of the CESS cannot be treated as Adjusted Total Turnover. The appellant's request to change the formula based on a Circular was dismissed as the Rule has precedence over Circulars.3. Regarding the Circular on Compensation Cess, the appellant claimed that no Cess should be charged on exported goods and that the remaining Cess would be a cost to exports if refunds were not allowed. However, the judgment did not find merit in this argument and did not entertain the request for changing the formula for Adjusted Total Turnover based on the Circular.4. The appellant also raised concerns about the Principle of Natural Justice, stating that they had exported all goods subject to CESS and should be eligible for full refunds on those exports. However, the judgment did not find this argument compelling and rejected the appeals based on the legal provisions of the CGST Rules 2017.In conclusion, the appeals were rejected by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals) based on the legal provisions and definitions outlined in the CGST Rules 2017, dismissing the appellant's arguments regarding the method of calculating refunds, Circular on Compensation Cess, and eligibility for refunds based on the Principle of Natural Justice.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
