The export related refunds should not be rejected due to minor procedural lapse or non-substantive errors or omission which can be rectified subsequently.
Refund— In the instant case, the adjudicating authority has rejected the part amount of refund claims on the various grounds.
The adjudicating authority has denied the refund on the ground that the address of the recipient is not mentioned on the invoices of M/s Adinath Industries, Further, in the copy of GSTR-2A, M/s Kamla Iron Store is nowhere mentioned. Thus, the appellant has contravened the provisions the Rule 46 and the Notification No.39/2018- Central Tax, dated 04.09.2018.
The adjudicating authority has also alleged that as per Section 31 (g) of the CGST Act, 2017, payment voucher is required to be issued by the registered person who is liable to pay tax under section (3) or sub section (4) of Section 9.
Held that—I find force in the contention of the appellant and also observe that the export related refunds should not be rejected due to minor procedural lapse or non-substantive errors or omission which can be rectified subsequently. The appellant is directed to submit the original rectified invoices duly authenticated by the suppliers before the adjudicating authority for verification who may sanction the refund involved therein if the same is found in order and admissible otherwise.