TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....N) codes of Chapter 15 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 ("CGST Act, 2017"):- HSN Description 15119091 Palm oil and its fractions. 15079010 Soya-Bean Oil and its fraction. 15122910 Sunflower seed, Cotton seed oil and its fractions. 15089091 Ground-Nut Oil and its fractions. 15141920 Rape, Colza or Mustard Oil and its fractions. 3.2 The case of the Petitioner is that the applicable rate of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the outward supply of goods falling under the said HSN codes is 5%. However, for the purposes of manufacturing and trading, the Petitioner procures various inputs and input services, including but not limited to packaging materials, oil seeds, and other chemicals, which attract GST at rates of 5%, 12%, 18%, and 28%. 3.3 The Petitioner contends that it is subjected to an inverted duty structure, wherein the rate of tax on inward supplies is higher than the rate applicable to outward supplies. Consequently, there has been an accumulation of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) in the Petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL). 3.4 According to the Petitioner, it is entitled to claim a refund of such accumulated ITC in accordance wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Refund Rejected Mar' 20 1,42,881 6. AA2402230985646 24.02.23 Refund Rejected Jan' 20 7,43,035 7. AA240123146520V 30.01.23 Refund Rejected Jan to Mar' 19 16,11,420 8. AA240123100752Y 20.01.23 Refund Rejected Sept to Nov' 18 4,82,761 3.10. The Petitioner's refund applications for the said period were, however, rejected by the authorities on the basis of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022, issued by Respondent No. 3.11. The said rejections were premised on the ground that the Petitioner was not eligible to file refund applications after the date of Notification No. 09/2022-Central Tax (Rate), i.e., 18.07.2022. 4. The Petitioner Company being aggrieved by the Circular issued by the Respondent No. 1, filed the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs: A. "YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari/Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, against the Respondents, quashing the Impugned Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10th November 2022 annexed at ANNEXURE-D issued by Respondent No. 1 by declaring that the same is ultra vires to the provisions of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y structure in case of specified goods falling under chapter 15 and 27 was restricted and not allowed. b. In continuation to Notification No 09/2022-Central Tax (Rate), clarification in form of Circular No. 181/33/2022-GST was being issued by CBIC on 10-11-2022. Relevant clarificatory para from Circular is reproduced as under: Q. Whether the restriction placed on refund of un-utilized input tax credit on account of inverted duty structure in case of certain goods falling under chapter 15 and 27 vide Notification No. 09/2022-Central Tax (Rate) dated 13.07.2022, which has been made effective from 18.07.2022, would apply to the refund applications pending as on 18.07.2022 also or whether the same will apply only to the refund applications filed on or after 18.07.2022 or whether the same will be applicable only to refunds pertaining to prospective tax periods?" A. "The restriction imposed vide Notification No. 09/2022-Central Tax (Rate) dated 13.07.2022 on refund of unutilized input tax credit on account of inverted duty structure in case of specified goods falling under chapter 15 and 27 would apply prospectively only. Accordingly, it is clarified that the restriction imposed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fications issued by the Board from time to time. As per the Circular No. 181/33/2022-GST was being issued by CBIC on 10-11-2022, it is clear that Notification No. 09/2022-CT (RATE) dated 13th July'2022 should apply to refund applications filed after 18.07.22. 13. Since the present refund application has been filed on 20.01.23 the claimed refund cannot be sanctioned. In view of the foregoing, I reject the refund amount of Rs. 4,82,761/-." 8. The other rejection orders are very similarly worded. Thus it would be seen that reliance has been placed on the clarificatory paragraphs at Serial No. 2 of Circular dated 10.11.2022 being Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST, while rejecting the refund claims. 9. In Patanjali (Supra), this Court has held as under:- "11.4 This Court in the case of Ascent Meditech (Supra) has held as under:- "48. In view of the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 24.08.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside. The Circular No. 181/22 dated 10.11.2022 so far as it clarifies that the amendment is not clarificatory in nature is quashed and set aside and it is held that the Notification No. 14/2022 is applicable retrospectively as the amendment brought in ....