TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es that fresh applications for refund or Show Cause Notices would not be necessary, considering that the proceedings emanated from the petitioner filing applications for refund which was culminated in Orders-in-Appeals passed by the appellate authority - Undisputedly, the Revenue is entitled to file an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, however, the said appeal is required to be filed within a period of three months. The said period has been extended as the Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted as yet. It cannot be accepted that the Revenue can ignore the orders passed by the appellate authority mainly on the ground that it proposes to file an appeal - petition allowed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iming refund of unutilised Input Tax Credit, amounting to ?46,38,276/- for the financial year 2018-19. Thereafter, on 14.04.2021, the petitioner filed an application seeking refund of the unutilised Input Tax Credit, amounting to ?2,15,63,451/- for the period 2019-20. A tabular statement indicating the period for which refund was sought and the amount claimed, is set out below: Sl. No. Period Amount of refund claimed (INR) 2018-19 1. Apr-June 14,89,720/- 2. July-Sept 3,82,149/- 3. Oct-Dec 9,32,211/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the period October, 2019 to March, 2020; Order-in-Appeal No. 114-115/2022-23 dated 28.07.2022 for the period April, 2019 to September, 2019 and Order-in-Appeal No. 120-123/2022-23 dated 28.07.2022 for the period 2018-19. 11. It is also relevant to note that the appellate authority also accepted the petitioner s contention that in case of voluminous transactions of export of services to customers located outside India, transaction-wise FIRC is not feasible. The relevant observations made by the appellate authority in this regard are set out below: As regards discrepancy related to FIRC observed in the impugned order I find force in the contention of appellant in their case of voluminous transaction of export of services to customer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i. Show Cause Notice dated 21.02.2023 in respect of claim for refund for an amount of Rs. 46,38,276/-. iii. Deficiency Memo dated 16.11.2022 in respect of claim for refund for an amount of Rs. 1,53,31,257/-. 14. It is stated that the petitioner did not respond to the said Show Cause Notices or Deficiency Memos. 15. Mr. Singla, learned Counsel for the respondent, submits that the issues raised by the respondent relates to the furnishing of FIRCs. He has referred to the observations made by the appellate authority as referred above and submitted that the decision of the appellate authority is erroneous and the Revenue proposes to file an appeal against the said decision as and when an appellate tribunal is constituted. 16. We a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
