9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Kumar Routhu (In W.P.Nos.15358, 15387, 15410,15416 & 15419 of 2023) COMMON ORDER: (PER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO) M/s. SEIL Energy India Limited is the petitioner in all these writ petitions. As the same issue is raised in all these writ petitions, they are being disposed of, by way of this common order. 2. Heard Sri Raghavan Ramabadran, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Lakshmi Kumaran Sridharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Y.N. Vivekananda, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The petitioner generates electrical power and sells the same to its customers. For the period January 2022 to October 2022, the petitioner had been selling/supplying electricity to M/s. Bangladesh Power Development Board ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same was answered in a Judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 11194 of 2021 and batch. This Court had taken the view that the said amendment should be treated as retrospective and the benefit of the amended Rule would be available to the petitioner. 6. The 2nd respondent, who had earlier issued a show cause notice requiring the production of bill of shipping, amended the said notice and called upon the petitioner to produce the REA account maintained by the Regional Load Dispatch Center for processing the applications. Consequently, the petitioner produced the said REA account for the periods January 2022 to October 2022. However, these applications were rejected by the 2nd respondent by va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the 7th day of the succeeding month, the REA account of the previous month would be the relevant REA for considering the application for refund for the succeeding month. 9. Sri Y. N. Vivekananda, learned counsel for the respondents would support the view taken by the Primary Authority and the Appellate Authority. He would submit that the Rule is clear and unambiguous and it is only the REA for the month for which refund is being sought that can be looked into for deciding whether a refund is payable or not. He would submit that as the petitioner had not filed the REA for the relevant period, the order of rejection cannot be faulted. Consideration of the Court: 10. A brief review of the provisions of law would be necessar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 31, to issue the invoice with respect to the supply; or (b) the date on which the supplier receives the payment with respect to the supply: Provided that where the supplier of taxable goods receives an amount up to one thousand rupees in excess of the amount indicated in the tax invoice, the time of supply to the extent of such excess amount shall, at the option of the said supplier, be the date of issue of invoice in respect of such excess amount. Explanation 1.--For the purposes of clauses (a) and (b), "supply" shall be deemed to have been made to the extent it is covered by the invoice or, as the case may be, the payment. Explanation 2.--or the purposes of clause (b), "the date on which the supplier receives the payment" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. (6) The time of supply to the extent it relates to an addition in the value of supply by way of interest, late fee or penalty for delayed payment of any consideration shall be the date on which the supplier receives such addition in value. 12. Section 12 (2) of the CGST Act provides for fixing the time of supply on either of two eventualities. The time of supply can be fixed on the date when the invoice for such supply is prepared and sent by the supplier or on the date on which the payment for such supply is made by the person receiving such goods. However, the legislature has also stipulated that the earlier of these two eventualities would be treated as the time of supply for the purpose of assessment of tax. Section 12 (2) also st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he REA for the preceding month, while making an application for refund in the succeeding month would be in accord with the said provisions of the Act and Rules. 16. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are allowed, setting aside the orders in appeal and the orders in original contained in the table set out in the present order, with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the applications of the petitioner for grant of refund, if everything else is in accord with the requirements, by permitting the petitioner to produce the REA of the previous month as the proof of export for the refund applications made in the succeeding month. There shall be no order as to costs. 15. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
