Back
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, HARISH KUMAR
Induvarna LPG Bottling Private Limited, through its Managing Director, Jnanendra Jha (Male), S/o Dr. (Prof) Binodanand Jha – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the Secretary Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.)
The petitioner is before this Court claiming a refund of the tax paid by the petitioner on the ‘Inverted Duty Structure’ applicable to the business carried on by the petitioner; being bottling of LPG.
2. The petitioner purchases LPG in bulk after paying the applicable tax. The bulk LPG purchased is bottled in cylinders and sale is made to customers, collecting tax from commercial users; at the same rate of purchase of LPG and to the domestic users, at a lesser rate. As per Section 54(3)(ii) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for brevity ‘CGST Act’) read with Rule 89(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for brevity ‘CGST Rules’) a refund of such differential tax is provided which is defined by the term ‘Inverted Duty Structure’.
3. Section 54 has the nominal heading of ‘Refund of tax’ under which the refund of higher tax paid on purchase, than that levied on subsequent sale; is provided by sub-section (1). It is also a mandate that such refund application shall be filed before the expiry of two years from the relevant date, in such form and manner as may be prescribed. The petitioner had paid tax in accordance with the
The relevant date for filing refund applications under the CGST Act is the date of communication of the appellate order, not the original assessment date.
The court affirmed that the right to claim Input Tax Credit refunds is unambiguous and cannot be restricted arbitrarily by circulars or notifications that infringe upon statutory rights.
Input tax credits accrued before the effective date of a notification can be claimed despite subsequent restrictions, as clarified by the court.
The restrictions on refund of accumulated input tax credit under Notification No. 9/2022 apply prospectively only, allowing claims for periods prior to the notification while filed within the statuto....
The main legal point established is that the statutory scheme of refund under Section 54(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 applies to cases of accumulation of unutilised input tax credit due to an inverted du....
The court established that the limitation period for refund applications under the CGST Act is determined by the original filing date, not subsequent deficiencies.
The court determined that the appellant's refund application was timely despite prior conflicting findings and ruled on unjust enrichment based on lack of evidence.
Despite the cancellation of GSTIN registration, a registered person is entitled to claim refunds under Section 54(3) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
