2026 (3) TMI 339 - AAR - GST

Refund of accumulated input tax credit under inverted duty structure not admissible for advance ruling; application rejected.

Application seeking an advance ruling on refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure was held inadmissible under Section ... Advance ruling jurisdiction - Refund of accumulated input tax credit ​​​​​​​- Jurisdictional limitation - inverted duty structure - scope of matters covered under Section 97(2) - Jurisdiction to rule on the refund quantification or sanction. Advance ruling application for refund under inverted duty structure - HELD THAT:- The Authority examined the applicant's questions which sought guidance on the manner of claiming refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure and on claiming refund under the category of 'refund on any other ground'. These questions concern quantification and sanction of refund under the refund provisions (section 54 and the rules) and are therefore matters of refund administration. Section 95(a) read with section 97(2) restricts the Authority's jurisdiction to the categories specified therein; matters concerning quantification or sanction of refund fall outside the enumerated categories in section 97(2). Consequently, the application does not raise a question within the scope of section 97(2) and is therefore inadmissible before the Authority for Advance Ruling. [Paras 4, 10]. Final Conclusion: The Authority rejected the application for advance ruling as inadmissible and outside its jurisdiction, and proceeded to reject the application under the provisions governing advance rulings. 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).