Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

Contention of respondent is that G.S.T. can be refunded to the same dealer from whom it is collected, petitioner is not eligible to claim refund.

Refund — Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017— The petitioner, a partnership firm dealing in Seeds, Food Grains etc. He purchased rejected wheat from Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation Ltd. in the year 2017. The corporation wrongly deducted GST from the security deposit made by the petitioner, although, as per the advance ruling issued by the Appellate Authority, Uttarakhand, damaged wheat seeds attracted NIL rate of GST. The corporation has not taken any decision in the matter and has not initiated any steps for claiming refund of GST from the Competent Authority. The petitioner sought to command the respondent corporation to correct the outward supplies vis-à-vis petitioner firm in Annual Return 2017-2018 and apply for refund of excess tax paid via RFD-01A and pay/ refund the entire amount collected from petitioner as GST alongwith interest thereon forthwith and to direct the GST Authorities to refund the amount of GST wrongly charged & collected. The respondent department submitted that in view of Section 54 (8) (e), prayer no.2 cannot be granted, as the GST can be refunded to the same dealer from whom it is collected. Held that—the Hon’ble High Court directed the Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation Ltd. to take decision on petitioner’s representation dated 20.09.2019 within eight weeks. — Rungta And Sons Rungta Industries Compound Vs. Uttarakhand Seeds And Tarai Development Corporation Ltd., The Superintendent Range III CGST Bagwara Mandir Rudrapur, The Deputy Commissioner SGST Rudrapur And Ors. [2020] 27 TAXLOK.COM 026 (Uttarakhand)

Join Whats App Group
Check Your Tax Knowledge
Product Demo
Tax Lok English Viedo
Tax Lok Hindi Viedo
whatsapp with taxlok SUBSCRIBE OUR MAGAZINE