2022 (4) TMI 1140 - AAR - GST

EOU advance ruling application dismissed for lacking jurisdiction over tax refund questions under Section 97(2) GST Act

In Re: M/s. Sivanthi Joe Coirs.

The AAR Tamil Nadu dismissed an advance ruling application filed by an EOU regarding IGST payment procedures and refund entitlements on imports/exports. ... Maintainability of Advance Ruling application - Payment of IGST/Compensation Cess on import of goods - requirement to follow the procedure prescribed in Explanation to Rule 96 (10) of CGST Rules, 2017 vide Notification 16/2020 - Central Tax dt. 23rd March 2020 and effective from 23.10.2017 - entitlement to export goods on payment of IGST and claim refund - Rule 96(10) of COST Rules, 2017 read with Section 16(3) of IGST Act, 2017 - requirement or an EOU to apply in FORM RFD-01 and get refund under Rule 89 (4) vide Notification No. 75/2017 Dated 29-12-2017 applicable w.e.f. 23.10.2017 read with Section 16 (3) of IGST Act, 2017. HELD THAT:- The question in respect of applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of the Act is covered under the ambit of this authority. In the case at hand, the applicant has stated that the question pertain to the applicability of Notification No. 16/2020-CTR dated 23.03.2020. On perusal it is seen that there is no notification No. 16/2020-C.T.(R) dated 23.03.2020 but there is a notification No.16/2020-Central Tax dt. 23-3-2020. The said Notification No. 16/2020 dt. 23.03.2020, amends the CGST Rules 2017. Among the various amendments proposed to the Rules, in the said Notification, vide Si. No. 10 of the said Notification, an Explanation was inserted in Rule 96(10)(b), with effective from 23rd October 2017, the related 'amendment' made to Rule 96(10) which is relied on by the applicant - it is evident that Notification, the applicability of which is raised before us, amends the Rules with the insertion of the explanation is to Rule 96(10)(b). Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules 2017 restricts the circumstances for a person claiming Integrated Tax paid on exports of goods or services. This authority do not have jurisdiction to admit questions relating to refund of any tax paid by the applicant as per Section 97(2) of GST Act - thus, these questions are not admissible for ruling before this authority. Whether it is compulsory for an EOU to procure goods/services without payment of tax from domestic suppliers as contemplated vide Notification No. 48/2017-Central Tax dated the 18th of October 2017 read with Section 147 of CGST Act, 2017? - HELD THAT:- Ruling means a decision extended in relation to the supply made or proposed to be made by the applicant. In the case at hand, the question is on the procurement to be made by the applicant and not on the supplies made or proposed to be made by them. The subject issue is related to 'receipt of supply' with or without tax for exports. As per section 95(a) only the 'supplier of goods or services or both' alone is eligible to seek advance ruling. The applicant being recipient in respect of the question, it is noticed that this question is also 'outside the purview of the Advance Ruling Authority' under 97 (2) of the GST Act. Application dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Procedure for paying IGST/Compensation Cess on import of goods by an EOU.2. Eligibility to export goods on payment of IGST and claim refund under Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017.3. Compulsory procurement of goods/services without payment of tax from domestic suppliers by an EOU.4. Compulsory application in FORM RFD-01 for refund under Rule 89(4) of CGST Rules, 2017.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Procedure for paying IGST/Compensation Cess on import of goods by an EOUThe applicant sought clarification on whether an Export Oriented Unit (EOU) can follow the procedure prescribed in the 'Explanation to Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017' as per Notification 16/2020 - Central Tax dated 23rd March 2020 and effective from 23.10.2017, which involves paying IGST/Compensation Cess on import of goods. The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) stated that questions related to the procedure for claiming refunds fall outside the purview of the Advance Ruling Authority as per Section 97(2) of the GST Act, which does not cover refund-related queries.Issue 2: Eligibility to export goods on payment of IGST and claim refund under Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017The applicant inquired if, after following the procedure mentioned in Issue 1, they could continue to export goods on payment of IGST and claim refunds under Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017 read with Section 16(3) of IGST Act, 2017. The AAR reiterated that this question also pertains to the procedure for claiming refunds, which is outside the jurisdiction of the Advance Ruling Authority.Issue 3: Compulsory procurement of goods/services without payment of tax from domestic suppliers by an EOUThe applicant asked whether it is compulsory for an EOU to procure goods/services without payment of tax from domestic suppliers as per Notification No. 48/2017-Central Tax dated 18th October 2017 read with Section 147 of CGST Act, 2017. The AAR clarified that the question relates to the procurement of goods/services, which is not covered under the definition of 'Advance Ruling' as per Section 95(a) of the CGST/TNGST Act. The ruling pertains to the supply of goods/services made or proposed to be made by the applicant, not to the procurement.Issue 4: Compulsory application in FORM RFD-01 for refund under Rule 89(4) of CGST Rules, 2017The applicant sought clarification on whether it is compulsory for an EOU to apply in FORM RFD-01 and get a refund under Rule 89(4) of CGST Rules, 2017. The AAR stated that this question also falls under the category of refund procedures, which is outside the scope of the Advance Ruling Authority as per Section 97(2) of the GST Act.Ruling:(i) Questions 1, 2, and 4, which pertain to the applicability of the explanation inserted to the rules governing the provisions of 'REFUNDS' of Integrated tax paid by the applicant, fall outside the purview of Section 97(2) and are therefore not admitted.(ii) Question 3, which concerns the receipt of supply by the applicant and not the supply made by them, is also outside the purview of the Advance Ruling Authority as per Section 97(2) of the GST Act.Conclusion:The entire application was rejected as the questions raised were either related to refund procedures or pertained to procurement, both of which fall outside the jurisdiction of the Advance Ruling Authority.