https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756537 Delhi HC disposed of petitioner's appeal under Section 107 CGST Act regarding refund of accumulated ITC for zero-rated supply. Court held that proper officer's demand for BRCs, bank statements and supplier ledger accounts was not in conformity with Rule 92(3) CGST Rules as no deficiency memo was issued. Petitioner had furnished BRCs evidencing realization of export sale proceeds, making them eligible for refund under Section 16(3) IGST Act. However, regarding verification of payments to suppliers, court found adjudicating authority's satisfaction incomplete despite petitioner providing bank statements and supplier details. Matter remanded to adjudicating authority for fresh decision on limited question of whether petitioner made payments to suppliers for inward supplies. en-us Fri, 26 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 May 2026 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756537 Delhi HC disposed of petitioner's appeal under Section 107 CGST Act regarding refund of accumulated ITC for zero-rated supply. Court held that proper officer's demand for BRCs, bank statements and supplier ledger accounts was not in conformity with Rule 92(3) CGST Rules as no deficiency memo was issued. Petitioner had furnished BRCs evidencing realization of export sale proceeds, making them eligible for refund under Section 16(3) IGST Act. However, regarding verification of payments to suppliers, court found adjudicating authority's satisfaction incomplete despite petitioner providing bank statements and supplier details. Matter remanded to adjudicating authority for fresh decision on limited question of whether petitioner made payments to suppliers for inward supplies. Case-Laws GST Fri, 26 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756537