https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409966 The appellate authority upheld the adjudicating authority's decision that the refund claim was time-barred under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, as it was filed after the two-year limitation period from the date of supply to the SEZ unit. The principle of natural justice was found to have been followed in the case, as the adjudicating authority provided sufficient reasoning for rejecting the claim. Consequently, the appellant's appeal was rejected, and the order was disposed of accordingly. en-us Tue, 13 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409966 The appellate authority upheld the adjudicating authority's decision that the refund claim was time-barred under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, as it was filed after the two-year limitation period from the date of supply to the SEZ unit. The principle of natural justice was found to have been followed in the case, as the adjudicating authority provided sufficient reasoning for rejecting the claim. Consequently, the appellant's appeal was rejected, and the order was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws GST Tue, 13 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409966