Rebate under Notification 41/2012 ST dated 29.06.2012

[Hariharan Sundaram]

Sir, We have filed a refund claim under Para 3 of the Notification 41/2012 ST (document based rebate). The rebate amount claimed by us is more than the rebate amount as per Para 2 of the said notification. The department has rejected the same on the ground that as per condition specified under Para 1(c) of the notification we have not fulfilled condition to the extent that the difference between rebate as per paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 is less than twenty per cent of the rebate available under the procedure specified in paragraph 2 since the difference between Para 2 and 3 is in negative. For example, we have filed rebate claim for ₹ 5000/- as per Para 3 and as per Para 2, the rebate is 3000/-. The department claim is ₹ 3000 - ₹ 5000 is -2000/- (negative number ) Kindly guide us whether the department stand is correct or not? pl help me with any orders, clarifications board circulars case law on the issue

[Hariharan Sundaram]

Dear experts pl clarify my above doubt. Nobody is answering so far. Kindly help me out of the issue.

[TAMAN GILL]

The department calculation seems wrong because as per condition specified under Para 1(c) of the notification Notification 41/2012 ST. For e.g.:- Rebate claim you filed=Rs.5000(as under para 3), Assume Rebate under Para 2 be ₹ 3000, Difference=5000-3000/3000 i.e. 67%...i.e. more than 20%...hence rebate should be sanctioned by para 3 i.e. through documents.Please clarify with the department authorities i would recommend.

AI Summary

Participant Challenges Rejected Refund Claim Under Notification 41/2012 ST, Citing Incorrect Department Calculations Exceeding 20% Threshold A discussion forum participant filed a refund claim under Notification 41/2012 ST, claiming a rebate amount higher than allowed under Para 2 of the notification. The department rejected the claim, arguing that the difference between the rebates under Para 2 and Para 3 was negative, not meeting the condition that the difference must be less than 20% of the rebate under Para 2. Another participant argued that the department's calculation was incorrect, as the difference was actually 67%, exceeding the 20% threshold, and advised clarifying this with the authorities.