TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisions in the APGST Act. 2. The present application has been filed u/s 97 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and AP Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to CGST Act and APGST Act respectively) by M/s. Arima Minerals And Metals Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as applicant), registered under the AP Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. Brief Facts of the case: M/S Arima Minerals and Metals Private Limited. (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") is engaged the export of goods under Letter of Undertaking [....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 89 (1) (a) of CGST/APGST Act and View-1, The refund officer not treating the SEZ unit (claimant) as a supplier to SEZ. Is this view is right? 5. Can the refund claim be sanctioned in the same line as per recent Gujarat High Court decision dated 03/02/2023 in M/s. SE Forge Limited Vs Union of India? 6. Enlighten the appropriate section and rule to file the refund application without rejection by the officer again. On verification of basic Information or the applicant, it is Observed that the applicant is under state jurisdiction i.e, Gajuwaka Circle, Visakhapatnam-II division. Accordingly, the application has been forwarded to the jurisdictional officer and a copy marked to the Central Tax authorities to offer their re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g as Supplier] View-2 6. The company is registered as SEZ unit, hence supplies to SEZ is zero rated supply and not liable pay IGST on purchase from the DTA units. But supplier charged IGST, collected the Invoice amount Including GST and passed the Credit in GSTR-2A, hence eligible credlt claimed in GSTR-3B. Since Zero-rated supply, without payment or IGST under the Letter of Undertaking, the credit remained unutilised and eligible for refund as per section 16 (3) of IGST Act. The refund processing officer rejected the claim stating that, being SEZ unit, refund application to be filed by the supplier to SEZ not recipient. This statement can be applied only when the Supplier to SEZ has not passed on the credit to us, Rule 89 was applied....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pe, the applicant has ticked the box corresponding to 'admissibility of Input Tax Credit tax paid or deemed to have been paid. In contrary to the above, as seen from their questions in the application it is noticed that they are seeking clarification in respect of the eligibility of the refund claim. Section 97 (2) of CGST/APGST Act does not cover the rejected proceedings on which Advance Ruling can be sought. The under signed authority on taking cognizance of the deficiency memos issued by the jurisdictional officer i.e AC (ST) Gajuwaka Circle, Visakhapatnam-II Division, against the appellant company on the subject issue, it is apparent that proceeding are issued against the applicant on the same subject which was raised in the a....