Refund of accumulated ITC

[Kaustubh Karandikar]

XYZ importing goods against ‘Advance Authorization’. They had also fulfilled export obligation against the same by exporting the goods without payment of GST under LUT. They are now filing refund claim of accumulated ITC on account of continuous exports. Can they consider the value of exports made for fulfilment of export obligation against advance authorization, while claiming refund of accumulated ITC?

[Rajagopalan Ranganathan]

Sir,

For claiming the accumulated credit due to continuous export there is no question of verifying value of exported goods. Only thing required you have to produce the proof export and bank realization certificate.

[KASTURI SETHI]

Q. Can they consider the value of exports made for fulfilment of export obligation against advance authorization, while claiming refund of accumulated ITC?

Sir, Answer is NO. Disallowed by the department against such export..

[Adarsh Sharma]

XYZ had imported under AA and Exported under LUT and intended to claim the refund under Rule 89, XYZ can consider the value of Export for Refund under Rule 89 on which is also considered as value of export for the purpose of DGFT (fulfillment of AA obligation)

If XYZ is imported under AA he can not Export under Rule 96 (on payment of IGST), there is a restriction to claim the refund under Rule 96 (10)

In my view XYZ can claim accumulated ITC as refund under Rule 89.

AI Summary

XYZ Seeks ITC Refund for Exports Under Advance Authorization; Debates on Relevance of Export Value and Applicable Rules XYZ is seeking to claim a refund of accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to continuous exports under an Advance Authorization scheme. They have fulfilled their export obligations without paying GST under a Letter of Undertaking (LUT). One respondent suggests that the value of exported goods is not relevant for claiming accumulated credit, only proof of export and a bank realization certificate are needed. Another respondent states that the department disallows considering the value of exports for this purpose. A third respondent believes XYZ can claim a refund under Rule 89, but not under Rule 96 due to restrictions.