Raja Abhishek For NIRC 2024

@abhishekrajaram

2 months ago

โ€ขView on Twitter

๐Ÿ“ฐ ๐——๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ต๐—ถ ๐—›๐—ถ๐—ด๐—ต ๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜ ๐—ฅ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด: ๐—š๐—ฆ๐—ง ๐——๐—ฒ๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜ ๐—ข๐—ฟ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—œ๐—ง๐—– ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—”๐—ณ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—ช๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ป๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น

๐Ÿ“ข The court held, "Repeated deficiency memos cannot be issued without specifics, especially post-appeal decisions granting a refund."

๐Ÿ” ๐—™๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐˜๐˜€: โ€ข ๐—–๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—ง๐—ถ๐˜๐—น๐—ฒ: Advance Systems vs The Commissioner of Central Tax Excise and CGST โ€ข ๐—–๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—ก๐˜‚๐—บ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ: W.P.(C) 7248/2023 & CM APPL. 28227/2023 โ€ข ๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜: Delhi High Court โ€ข ๐——๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ: 07-Jul-2023

Issue: Advance Systems, an exporter, sought an Input Tax Credit (ITC) refund for the period January to September 2021 on exports under a Letter of Undertaking (LUT). Initially, the respondent issued a Show Cause Notice (SCN) and rejected the claim. On appeal, the appellate authority granted a partial refund. Despite the favorable appellate decision, the GST Department labeled the renewed application as "deficient" and requested additional documents and a fresh application in GST RFD-01.

๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜โ€™๐˜€ ๐—ฆ๐—ผ๐—น๐˜‚๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป: The Delhi High Court found the Departmentโ€™s request unjustified, stating that additional documents were unnecessary, as all were provided initially and affirmed in the appellate process. The court directed the respondent to process the refund as per the appellate order without further deficiencies or demands for previously submitted undertakings and declarations.

โš– ๐—๐˜‚๐—ฑ๐—ด๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜: The court mandated immediate refund processing based on the appellate authorityโ€™s orders, along with applicable interest. It also clarified that once an appellate decision grants a refund, taxpayers should not face redundant administrative hurdles.

๐Ÿ“œ This judgment reinforces taxpayer rights against repetitive procedural barriers, particularly where appellate decisions have already confirmed entitlements. It underscores that the Department must avoid arbitrary deficiency notices and process claims efficiently. Team GSTpanacea 7503031378

More from @abhishekrajaramReply on Twitter

Page created with TweetHunter

Write your own