GST refund maintainability depends on the registered service provider being the proper claimant under forward charge principles.

GST on construction services operates on a forward charge basis, so tax is payable by the service provider rather than the recipient. Where the construction services were provided by KG Foundation, the registered person under the GST regime, the refund claim had to be made by that registered person and not by the petitioner. The reference to the limitation period under Section 54 of the GST enactments did not change the maintainability analysis. The refund application was therefore not maintainable at the petitioner's instance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner could maintain a refund claim for GST paid on construction services when the services were provided by KG Foundation, the registered person under the GST regime.

Analysis: GST on construction services operates on a forward charge basis and is payable by the provider of services. The services in question were provided by KG Foundation, not by the petitioner. The refund claim was therefore required to be made by the registered person. The reference to the limitation period under Section 54 of the applicable GST enactments did not alter the conclusion on maintainability.

Conclusion: The refund application was not maintainable at the instance of the petitioner and the claim could not be pursued by it.

---