TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1727
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the part of the respondent no.1 in enacting Rule 96 (10) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017 ('CGST Rules', for short). In addition, the challenge is also raised to the action on the part of respondent no. 5, the Superintendent of Central Tax, Panaji-Goa, seeking certain records from the petitioner to ascertain violation of the impugned Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules. 2. The petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of electronic goods and accessories and is registered under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act, 2017). It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) and in order to manufacture, it imports raw material/inputs without payment of customs duty and IGST, claimi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h has been brought into force with effect from 09.10.2018. Another point which arises for consideration, according to Mr Raichandani, is whether this Notification will have a retrospective or prospective effect. In addition, one more point which arises for consideration, is that once the Rule has been omitted with effect from 08.10.2024, whether the adjudication based on the prevailing Rule can continue thereafter. 4. Continuing the narration of the facts, according to Mr Raichandani, the order dated 10.07.2024, which has fastened the liability upon the petitioner by alleging that it had wrongly claimed the refund of Rs. 6,88,11,571/- in contravention to Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and directing him to pay the wrongly availed ref....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said communication, the petitioner was specifically asked, whether it had availed the benefit of Notification No.78/2017 by the Customs Department as well as the Notification No.79/2017 both dated 13.10.2017 and a query was raised whether the Company has received input supplies, on which the suppliers have taken the benefit of the Notification dated 23.10.2017. The information was sought to be furnished before 24.10.2022. This was followed by another communication dated 07.11.2023, when the petitioner forwarded its response on 09.05.2023 and the petitioner was requested to provide copies of documents which included purchase bills, vouchers, shipping bills, export invoice as well as the bank statement for the relevant period and also the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tice shall be issued at least 3 months prior to the time limit prescribed in sub-section 10 from the issuance of the order, that is 3 years. Whenever such notice is served, it is also imperative for the proper officer to serve a statement, containing the details of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax wrongly availed or utilised for such periods other than the one covered under sub-section (1) on the person charged with tax. Upon receipt of the notice, it is open to the person to submit his representation and in wake of sub-section (9) of Section 73, the proper officer shall after considering the representation, if any, made by the person chargeable with tax, determine the amount of tax, interest and a penalty e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and penalty at what rate. The officer has arrived at a conclusion on the basis of the bill entry submitted by the petitioner, that during the tax period of claim of refund he had taken the benefit of the Notification dated 13.10.2017 and therefore wrongfully claimed the refund of Rs. 6,88,11,571/- which is in contravention with Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules, 2017. Had the petitioner being issued a show cause notice as contemplated under sub-section (1) of Section 73, and determination of this show cause notice pursuant to the representation/stand adopted by the petitioner, all the issues pertaining to the applicability of Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules 2017 would have been open for consideration by the concerned officer. However, since ....