Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + Commissioner GST - 2020 (10) TMI Commissioner This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 802 - Commissioner - GSTRefund of unutilized ITC - rejection on the ground that the address of the recipient is not mentioned on the invoices of M/s Adinath Industries - HELD THAT:- GSTIN of the recipient is not mentioned on the invoice of M/s OM Metals Auto Pvt Ltd. On the invoice of M/s Shri Sanwariya Trading Company, Fatehnagar also the address of recipient is not mentioned, Invoices submitted in reply to the deficiency memo are not acceptable as the details of address and GSTIN were not present on the invoices at the time of filing of refund claim and on the invoices submitted in reply to the deficiency memo the details of address and GSTIN have been typed later on the same original invoice copies. Thus, the appellant has contravened the provisions the Rule 46 and the Notification No.39/2018- Central Tax, dated 04.09.2018. The appellant has stated that now the invoices have already been rectified by the suppliers on the request of the appellant and the copies of the same have also been annexed with the appeal memo thus thereby complied Rule 46 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Refund claim rejected on payment voucher not provided by the assessee for the RCM invoice - HELD THAT:- As per the second proviso to Section 16 of the CGST Act. the recipient of supply will not lose the ITC of the tax paid under RCM even if payment to the supplier is not made within 180 days of the supplies - Circular No. 37/11/2018-GST dated: 15/03/2018 has been issued to clarify. various issue in relation to processing of claims for refund. In para 15 of the circular it is stated that it is also advised that refunds may not be withheld due to minor procedural lapse or non-substantive errors or omission-and requested for not to withheld refund claim due to minor procedural lapse or non-substantive errors or omission - 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. Appeal disposed off.
|