TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 792
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kata, West Bengal, 700001. The revenue served show cause-cum-demand notice No. 13/GST/AC/SSU/BBD BAG-1/2022-23 Dated 20.02.2023 on the taxpayer calling upon him to reply as to why :- "(i) Rs. 10,22,468/- (Rupees ten lakh twenty two thousand four hundred sixty eight only) (IGST Rs. 19,845/-, CGST of Rs. 4,95,811/- and SGST of Rs. 4,95,811/- and CESS Rs. 11,000/-) which was collected by them but not paid (as detailed in the Annexure-A) in violation of the provisions of Section 39, Section 49 of provisions of the CGST Act read with corresponding Section of the WB SGST Act 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act 2017 should not be recovered from them under Section 73 of the CGST Act, as amended. read with Corresponding Section of the WB SGST Act 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act 2017, as amended: (ii) Rs. 6,867/- (Rupees six thousand eight hundred sixty seven only) (IGST of Rs.445/CGST of Rs. 3,211/- and SGST of Rs. 3,211/-) for Tax period July 2017 to March 2019 involved in Exempted and Nil rated supply not reversed by them in violation of the provision of Section 17 of the CGST Act read with corresponding Section of the WB SGST Act 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....March, 2019 on account of exempted/non-GST/nil dated supply was Rs. 84,460/- as per the GSTR-9. The taxpayer availed ITC to the tune of Rs. 6,867/- for which he was not eligible on account of exempted/non-GST and nil dated supply. But he did not reverse the ineligible ITC availed by him.; (iii) the taxpayer availed excess ITC to the tune of Rs. 47,32,749/- which was revealed from the absence of reference to invoices in GSTR-2A; (iv) the mismatch appearing between GSTR-3B and GSTR-9 also indicated that the taxpayer had taken excess credit of ITC to the tune of Rs. 5,90,689/- from April 2018 to March, 2019; (v) the taxpayer submitted reply dated 24.04.2023 to the show cause notice in which he stated as under :- "4 Reply to the Show Cause Notice submitted on 24.04.2023: The reply of the noticee is reproduced below in verbatim: "With reference to the above captioned subject, I have submitted letter on 28.03.23 in continuation reply here with the same would like to inform you that in respect of our books have been audited by internal in that scenario we reversed ITC for the FY 2017-18 for of Rs. 47,47,306/-and attached DRC-03 Copy, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,228/- and order for payment of Rs. 18,960/- (IGST of Rs.7,960/- + Cess of Rs. 11,000/-) from them in terms of Section 73(9) of the CGST Act; (ii) I order for payment of appropriate interest as per Section 50(1) of the CGST Act on the confirmed amount mentioned in Sl. No. (i) above by the noticee under Section 73(9) of the CGST (iii) I impose a penalty amounting to Rs. 93,118/- (Rupees ninety three thousand one hundred eighteen only) (IGST of Rs. 796/- CGST of Rs. 45,611/ SGST of Rs. 45,611/ Cess of Rs. 1,100/-) upon the noticee in terms of Section 122(2)(a) of the CGST Act for contravention of the provisions of this Act and Rules made there under as discussed above; and (iv) I also impose a penalty amounting to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) [CGST of Rs. 25,000/- + SGST of Rs. 25,000/-) upon the noticee in terms of Section 122(3)(e) of the CGST Act for contravention of the provisions of this Act and Rules made there under as discussed above. (B) (i) I confirm Rs. 6,867/- (Rupees six thousand eight hundred sixty seven only) (IGST of Rs. 445/- CGST of Rs. 3,211/- + SGST of Rs. 3,211/-) as inadmissible ITC and confirm the demand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the CGST Act. As the noticee have already paid an amount of Rs. 19,162/- (CGST of Rs. 9,581/- SGST of Rs. 9,581/-) through DRC-03, as discussed in Para 6 above, I appropriate the said amount of Rs. 19,162/- and order for payment of IGST of Rs. 5,71,527/- from them in terms of Section 73(9) of the CGST Act: (ii)I order for payment of appropriate interest as per Section 50(3) of the CGST Act on the confirmed amount mentioned in Sl. No. (i) above by the noticee under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act; and (iii) I impose a penalty amounting to Rs. 59,068/- (Rupees fifty nine thousand and sixty eight only) (GST of Rs. 57,172/- CGST of Rs. 958/ SGST of Rs. 958/-) upon the noticee in terms of Section 122(2)(a) of the CGST Act for contravention of the provisions as discussed above. 8. This order is passed without prejudice to any other action which may be taken against the Noticee under any other law for the time being in force. [4]. Aggrieved by the order of the adjudicating authority, the taxpayer filed appeal under sub-section (1) of Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The first appellate authority heard the appeal and allowed it by delivering an order (in sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....admissible, shall be recredited to the electronic credit ledger of the taxpayer by the proper officer. iii) Circular No. 135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020 issued by CBIC in paragraph 4.3.1 has clarified this issue and the taxpayer is entitled to recredit in terms of such clarification issued by the CBIC. iv) The impugned order is based on reconciliation of the inputs provided in various returns and the audited accounts of the taxpayer and as such the order of the appellate authority is well founded. v) In absence of any error appearing in the impugned order, the said order passed by the first appellate authority has to be sustained. vi) The appellate authority has acted within its jurisdiction and passed a reasoned order on the basis of the evidence available on record and as such there is no reason to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority. [7]. In view of the rival contentions of the parties, two questions are arising for our determination : i) Whether the order of the first appellate authority allowing recredit to the taxpayer is legally correct. ii) Whether the re-computation of taxpayer's liability done....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Government. Accordingly, vide notification No.16/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020, sub-rule (4A) has been inserted in rule 86 of the CGST Rules, 2017 which reads as under: "(4A) Where a registered person has claimed refund of any amount paid as tax wrongly paid or paid in excess for which debit has been made from the electronic credit ledger, the said amount, if found admissible, shall be re-credited to the electronic credit ledger by the proper officer by an order made in FORM GST PMT-03." 4.3.2 Further, vide the same notification, sub-rule (1A) has also been inserted in rule 92 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The same is reproduced hereunder: "(1A) Where, upon examination of the application of refund of any amount paid as tax other than the refund of tax paid on zero-rated supplies or deemed export, the proper officer is satisfied that a refund under sub-section (5) of section 54 of the Act is due and payable to the applicant, he shall make an order in FORM RFD-06 sanctioning the amount of refund to be paid, in cash, proportionate to the amount debited in cash against the total amount paid for discharging tax liability for the relevant period, mentioning t....