TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wrong column i.e. 3.1(c) i.e. other outward taxable supplies (Nil rated, exempted) due to that refund claim was rejected. The appellant simply stated that they had filed GSTR-1 properly - Further, the appellant in their defence submission has not discussed/elaborated much about the amendment/correction/ rectification has been done in GSTR-1. The appellant did not file any corrected/modified GSTR-1 return of subsequent month for which the appellant was required to do. If the appellant has committed an error while submitting FORM GSTR-3B, the steps should have been taken to rectify the same. The corresponding column in the table provides the step to be followed by the appellant to rectify such error. The appellant was required to rectif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch may be summarized as under :- that The Learned Assistant Commissioner has erred in rejecting the amount of Refund of ₹ 22,27,497/- for the period from October, 2017 to December, 2017. that there is no dispute about the fact that the appellant have exported the goods without payment of Integrated Tax and the appellant is eligible for refund of accumulated input tax credit as per Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017. that further, there is no dispute about the facts that the appellant have filed the refund application in prescribed manner and with proper documents. that further also there is no dispute about the facts that the appellant had filed GSTR-1 return properly. that dispute is only that the appellant had shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he outward supplies have been under reported or excess reported in FORM GSTR-3B, the same may be correctly reported in the FORM GSTR-1. Similarly, if the details of inward supplies or the eligible ITC have been reported less or more than what they should have been, the same may be reported correctly in the FORM GSTR-2. This will get reflected in the revised output tax liability or eligible ITC, as the case may be, of the registered person. The details furnished in FORM GSTR-1 and FORM GSTR-2 will be auto-populated and reflected in the return in FORM GSTR-3 for that particular month. In the above circular it was clearly mentioned that if there is any error/omission, same can be rectified in the GSTR-1 return. In the present case the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... due to clerical error they have reported their turnover in 3.1(c) Nil rated instead of Zero-rated turnover 3.1(b) in GSTR-3B. The appellant in their defence has stated that there is no dispute about the facts that they had filed GSTR-1 return properly. As per Section 54(10) of the CGST Act, 2017 - Where any refund is due under sub-section (3) to a registered person who has defaulted in furnishing any return or who is required to pay any tax, interest or penalty, which has not been stayed by any Court, Tribunal or Appellate Authority by the specified date, the proper officer may - (a) withhold payment of refund due until the said person has furnished the return or paid the tax, interest or penalty, as the case may be; (b) de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... person. But I find that no such report/document were furnished by the appellant regarding reconciliation of the data. 7. I find that the appellant has committed an error in GSTR-3B by not furnishing the export value/sale figure in proper column i.e. 3.1(b) outward taxable supplies (Zero-rated) the export value/sale figures have been furnished in wrong column i.e. 3.1(c) i.e. other outward taxable supplies (Nil rated, exempted) due to that refund claim was rejected. The appellant simply stated that they had filed GSTR-1 properly. Further, I find that the appellant in their defence submission has not discussed/elaborated much about the amendment/correction/ rectification has been done in GSTR-1. I find that the appellant did not file any c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
