Non-filling of TRAN-1 cannot be the reason to reject the refund claim if the claim was otherwise lawful.
Refund— Section 142 of CGST Act— In the instant case, appellant has filed refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for the quarter of April to June, 2017 in respect of Cenvat credit availed on various inputs as majority of their final products were exported.
Said claim was rejected under impugned order holding that the claimant had not filed mandatory declaration electronically in the Form GST TRAN-1 as stipulated under Rule 117 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
it is observed that if the appellant had filed TRAN-1 and claimed the credit, in that case, it would had resulted in claiming of double benefit by the appellant. Therefore non-filling of TRAN-1 cannot be the reason to reject the refund claim if the claim was otherwise lawful.
Held that— the grounds of denial of the refund claim is rejected and the matter is remitted back to the adjudicating authority to scrutinize the claim in accordance with the provisions of Central Excise law and to order a fresh on eligibility of the refund to the appellant ensuring principle of natural justice.
Non-filling of TRAN-1 cannot be the reason to reject the refund claim if the claim was otherwise lawful.
Refund— Section 142 of CGST Act— In the instant case, appellant has filed refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for the quarter of April to June, 2017 in respect of Cenvat credit availed on various inputs as majority of their final products were exported.
Said claim was rejected under impugned order holding that the claimant had not filed mandatory declaration electronically in the Form GST TRAN-1 as stipulated under Rule 117 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
it is observed that if the appellant had filed TRAN-1 and claimed the credit, in that case, it would had resulted in claiming of double benefit by the appellant. Therefore non-filling of TRAN-1 cannot be the reason to reject the refund claim if the claim was otherwise lawful.
Held that— the grounds of denial of the refund claim is rejected and the matter is remitted back to the adjudicating authority to scrutinize the claim in accordance with the provisions of Central Excise law and to order a fresh on eligibility of the refund to the appellant ensuring principle of natural justice.