TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the application seeking advance ruling on refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure is admissible under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and accordingly whether the Authority has jurisdiction to rule on the refund quantification or sanction.
Analysis: The Authority examined the scope of matters covered under Section 97(2) and related provisions and compared them with the relief sought by the applicant. The applicant's questions concern the manner and quantification of refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure and the possibility of claiming refund under alternate categories. Those reliefs pertain to refund provisions under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the rules made thereunder, which deal with sanction and quantification of refunds. Such refund-administration issues do not fall within the categories of matters enumerated under Section 97(2) for which an Advance Ruling may be sought. The Authority therefore found the application to be outside its jurisdiction and not admissible under the statutory scheme.
Conclusion: The application is not admissible under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and is rejected under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017; decision is against the applicant and in favour of the revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: The Authority lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate or quantify refund claims arising under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 by way of an advance ruling under Section 97(2).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
