The adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim of Input Tax Credit accumulated on account of Inverted Duty Structure filed by the appellant held that the Tax Structure on major Input used and Final Product manufactured is same. Therefore, the accumulated input tax credit appeared not to be on account of Inverted tax structure and dis-allowed the refund claim.
Refund— In the instant case, the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim of Input Tax Credit accumulated on account of Inverted Duty Structure filed by the appellant under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 and held that the Tax Structure on major Input used and Final Product manufactured is same @ 5%.
Since the appellant has taken Input Tax Credit on the Input, namely Vanaspati and Cooking Oils, Packing material, Input Services related to job work and Capital Goods etc., which attracts different rates of GST Further. I also find that major inputs and output supply attracts the same rate of GST The contention of the appellant that word 'Inputs' used under Section 54(3) has no where been defined in the CGST Act, therefore in common practice of business 'Input' will include anything or service used in the manufacture of goods is not legally correct and not sustainable.
Held that— I find that the adjudicating authority has rightly passed the order and appellant is not entitled for refund of unutilized input tax credit. Therefore, the appeal is rejected to that extent.
The adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim of Input Tax Credit accumulated on account of Inverted Duty Structure filed by the appellant held that the Tax Structure on major Input used and Final Product manufactured is same. Therefore, the accumulated input tax credit appeared not to be on account of Inverted tax structure and dis-allowed the refund claim.
Refund— In the instant case, the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim of Input Tax Credit accumulated on account of Inverted Duty Structure filed by the appellant under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 and held that the Tax Structure on major Input used and Final Product manufactured is same @ 5%.
Since the appellant has taken Input Tax Credit on the Input, namely Vanaspati and Cooking Oils, Packing material, Input Services related to job work and Capital Goods etc., which attracts different rates of GST Further. I also find that major inputs and output supply attracts the same rate of GST The contention of the appellant that word 'Inputs' used under Section 54(3) has no where been defined in the CGST Act, therefore in common practice of business 'Input' will include anything or service used in the manufacture of goods is not legally correct and not sustainable.
Held that— I find that the adjudicating authority has rightly passed the order and appellant is not entitled for refund of unutilized input tax credit. Therefore, the appeal is rejected to that extent.