TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1332
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orm GST-RFD-06 for the tax period May 2020 dated 02.10.2022 herein marked as Annexure-B. iii) Issue a writ of a writ of mandamus or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue the refund claimed by the petitioner for the tax period May 2020 aggregating to a sum of Rs. 3,26,64,475/- as per the substituted formula provided in Notification No. 14/2022 Central Tax dated 05.07.2022, together with interest. iv) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard learned senior counsel Sri. Shankar. A., for Sri. Madhusudhan. U.A., learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in relation to the very same petitioner, under identical circumstances in W.P.No.2490/2023 dated 28.08.2024, this Court passed the following order: "ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- "i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the order passed by the Respondent N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period January 2019 dated 26.02.2021 herein marked as Annexure - B8. x) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the refund rejection order passed by the Respondent No.2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner in Form GST-RFD-06 for the tax period July 2019 dated 13.11.2021 herein marked as Annexure - B9 xi) Issue a writ of a writ of mandamus or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to issue the refund claimed by the petitioner for the March 2018, April 2018, May 2018, June 2018, August 2018, September 2018, October 2018, January 2019 and July 2019 aggregating to a sum of Rs. 20,22,19,265/- as per the substituted formula provided in Notification No. 14/2022-Central Tax dated 05.07.2022, together with interest. xii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the revenue and perused the material on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upation, whichever is earlier..... 6. Composite supply: The following composite supplies shall be treated as supply of services namely:- (a) Works contract as defined in clause (119) of Section 2 ; (b) xxxx Section 2 (119) of the CGST Act defines 'Works Contract' as under: "Works contract means a contract for building, construction, fabrication, completion, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property wherein transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) is involved in the execution of such contract." 7. A perusal of the impugned orders passed by the respondents will indicate that the refund claim of the petitioner has been rejected on two grounds, viz., firstly, that the business / activity being carried on by the petitioner was supply of services being construction within the meaning of Clause/Entry 5(b) of Schedule II to the CGST Act and not a composite supply in relation to a works contract as contemplated under Clause/Entry 6(a) of Schedule II to the Act and stood excluded from the refund mechan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a 'works contract' within the meaning of Item / Entry / Clause 6 (a) of Schedule II to the CGST Act and not item / Entry / Clause 5(b) which was not applicable to the supply of services by the petitioner and consequently, the said findings recorded by the respondents for the purpose of rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner deserve to be set aside and the refund claim of the petitioner deserves to be allowed. 11. Insofar as the rejection of the refund claim of the petitioner by the respondents by placing reliance upon the Notification No. 20/2017 dated 22.08.2017 is concerned, it is relevant to state that earlier, the revenue had issued a Notification bearing No. 15/2017 dated 28.06.2017 which specifically stated that no refund of unutilized ITC shall be allowed under sub-section (3) of Section 54 of the CGST Act in case of supply of services specified in sub-item (b) of Item 5 of Schedule - II of the CGST Act; it is pertinent to note that as per this Notification, only supply of services specified in Item 5(b) were excluded and services contemplated in Item 6(a) were not excluded from claim for refund; it followed therefrom that works contract provided in Item / En....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) of section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017), the Central Government, on the recommendations of the Council hereby notifies that no refund of unutilized input tax credit shall be allowed under clause (xiv) of section 21 of the said Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, read with sub-section (3) of section 54 of the said Central Goods and Services Tax Act, in case of supply of services ^1[of construction of a complex, building or a part thereof, intended for sale to a buyer, wholly or partly, where the amount charged from the recipient of service includes the value of land or undivided share of land, as the case may be, except where the entire consideration has been received after issuance of completion certificate,where required, by the competent authority or after its first occupation, whichever is earlier], 2017. 2. This notification shall come into force with effect from the 1st day of July, 2017. [F. No.334/1/2017 -TRU] (Ruchi Bisht) Under Secretary to the Government of India ***************** NOTES:- 1. Substituted vide Notification No. 15/2023-Union Territory Tax (Rate) dated ....