2021 (12) TMI 419

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise, Raipur (C.G.), whereby the appeal preferred by the Petitioner against the order dated 23.04.2020 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Deputy Commissioner has been dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Petitioner-M/s Radhemani And Sons (A Proprietorship Firm) had filed a refund claim of Rs. 12,69,255/- (Rupees Twelve Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Five only) as per the provisions prescribed under Rule 89 (1) of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'CGST Rules, 2017') on account of "Excess payment of IGST in February, 2018 in GSTR 3B Return" for the tax period February, 2018 in RFD-01. The said application was filed by the Petitioner on 18.03.2020 and af....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ating Authority as passed on 23.04.2020 (Annexure P-2). 4. Aggrieved therewith, the Petitioner has filed this petition and learned counsel for the Petitioner, while inviting attention to the Circular (Annexure P- 8), which was issued by Respondent No.3 on 25th September, 2021, submits that the word "subsequently held" as depicted from the provisions prescribed under Section 77 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 19 of IGST Act, 2017 was clarified by interpreting as under"- 3. Interpretation of the term "subsequently held" 3.1 Doubts have been raised regarding the interpretation of the term "subsequently held" in the aforementioned sections, and whether refund claim under the said sections is available only if supply made by a taxpayer as....