GSTAT Raipur
For revenue
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
3 rulings found
GSTAT Raipur
Where manufacturer claimed refund of unutilised ITC due to inverted duty structure and was sanctioned amount exceeding entitlement under Section 54 read with Rule 89(5), such payment qualified as refund and, if in excess, constituted an 'erroneous refund' recoverable under Section 73, without exclusion based on ITC origin, as confirmed by subsequent rule and circular. GST: Where assessee received refund on inverted-duty structure via RFD-06 order and department did not appeal or seek revision, initiation of recovery proceedings for erroneous refund under Section 73 was permissible as Section 73 operates independently with its own notice and limitation, and non-invocation of appeal or revision mechanisms does not bar such recovery action. GST: Where appellant received erroneous refund of Rs. 90.35 lakhs on inverted-duty structure and paid back principal amount during recovery proceedings without paying interest, interest under Section 50 at 18 percent per annum for delayed period was legally leviable as interest is compensatory, and mere payment of principal did not conclude liability or proceedings under Section 73
Allahabad High Court
Where assessee paid entire tax voluntarily after notice alleging evasion and without demur, acceptance of liability confirmed all terms and allegations in notice, thus assessee remained liable to equal penalty and interest as per Section 74, subsequent show cause notices only computed sums, and voluntary deposit did not absolve penalty or interest, so writ petition challenging demand was not tenable
GSTAT Lucknow
Where assessee claimed ITC in excess of amounts reflected in GSTR-2A for CGST and SGST but short-claimed IGST compared to GSTR-2A, IGST credit was rightfully permitted, however reversal of excess CGST and SGST was rightly sustained due to lack of supporting evidence, thus, appellate findings were to be upheld as no material rebutted these conclusions GST: Where ITC reversal was confirmed for CGST and SGST due to ITC mismatch in non-fraud proceedings, and first appellate authority reduced interest and penalty relying on record, appellant did not produce any new facts or evidence, thus levy and quantification of interest and penalty as directed in first appeal was to be sustained and appeal was to be dismissed