TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1065
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Order-in-Original bearing no. 91/2024-25 dated 7th April, 2025 passed by the Respondent-Assistant Commissioner of CGST, Delhi (hereinafter, 'impugned order'). 3. This petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking refund of the sum of Rs. 8,99,61,147/- in terms of the order dated 7th January, 2025 passed in W.P.(C) 16611/2024 titled 'Thales India Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner of CGST, Audit-II, Delhi & Anr.' The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted below: "10. As is manifest from a reading of the above, in circumstances where no invoice is raised in respect of services rendered by its foreign affiliate, the value of such services will be "''deemed" to have been declared as 'nil' and it i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ced herein below: "Rule 28 - Value of supply of goods or services or both between distinct or related persons, other than through an agent The value of the supply of goods or services or both between distinct persons as specified in sub-section (4) and (5) of section 25 or where the supplier and recipient are related, other than where the supply is made through an agent, shall- (a) be the open market value of such supply; (b) if the open market value is not available, be the value of supply of goods or services of like kind and quality; (c) if the value is not determinable under clause (a) or (b), be the value as determined by the application of rule 30 or rule 31, in that order: PROVIDE....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tained in Para 3.7 of the Circular. It would perhaps be impossible for any of the respondents to assert that once the value of such services were to be treated or accepted to be 'Nil', any further tax implication under the Act would arise. 13. While the correctness of the position as advocated in terms of that Circular and whether it would be consistent with the statutory provisions or may be viewed as being contentious or contrary to the intent of the Second Proviso to Rule 28 itself, we are today constrained to proceed further on the basis thereof We so observe since it may possibly be asserted that the Circular is founded on the tenuous thread of parties choosing to either generate an invoice or simply avoiding to do so. However....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the tax liability proceeding on the basis of Rule 28 and a perceived obligation to pay tax under the Act. The Order- in-Original however imposes a liability of interest and penalty upon that writ petitioner by invoking Section 15 along with Section 73 of the Act, read with Section 73(9). It is also undisputed before us that Sony India Private Limited had not only paid the tax but had also taken credit on a reverse charge basis. 18. In our considered opinion, once the position to govern all assessees pan-India came to be clarified by the CBIC, the continuation of penalty proceedings or for that matter the imposition of interest would not sustain. In light of the stand taken by the CBIC, the petitioner, Sony India Private Limited, wo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4945/2023 titled 'Metal One Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India', which dealt with an identical controversy and had quashed the Show Cause Notice therein dated 31st May, 2024. 5. The Petitioners then filed the refund application, which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 7th April, 2025. In the impugned order, Assistant Commissioner, Mr. Ram Gopal Sagar has made an observation to the following effect. "9. Further, I find that the decision of the Hon'ble Court in the matter of the noticee is based on the judgement pronounced in the case of M/s Metal One Corporation India Pvt Ltd and the same has not been accepted by the competent authority till date. In view of the above, I find that the Overseas Group Entity is the....