For filing of refund in case of supply made to SEZ the relevant date would be taken as per clause (a) of explanation 2 (2) of sub section (14) of Section 54 of CGST Act,2017. The appellant contention that the relevant date shall be taken from the date of payment of tax is not correct as specific provisions for relevant date in case of zero rated supply has been provided in the CGST ACT. Appeal is rejected.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Refund — The appellant filed refund claim on 17.10.2020 under Section 54 (3) (i) of the Act, 2017 in respect of supplies to SEZ on payment of IGST. The adjudicating authority issued SCN and further rejected the claim on limitation period. Being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 17.11.2020, the appellant has filed the appeal. The authority observed that the adjudicating authority while issuing the SCN dated 29.10.2020 as well as in the order dated 17.11.2020, has properly mentioned/elaborated the reason for rejection of refund claim. Therefore, it is not justified to say that the adjudicating authority/proper officer has not been passed the speaking order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority rejected the appeal filed by the appellant.
For filing of refund in case of supply made to SEZ the relevant date would be taken as per clause (a) of explanation 2 (2) of sub section (14) of Section 54 of CGST Act,2017. The appellant contention that the relevant date shall be taken from the date of payment of tax is not correct as specific provisions for relevant date in case of zero rated supply has been provided in the CGST ACT. Appeal is rejected.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Refund — The appellant filed refund claim on 17.10.2020 under Section 54 (3) (i) of the Act, 2017 in respect of supplies to SEZ on payment of IGST. The adjudicating authority issued SCN and further rejected the claim on limitation period. Being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 17.11.2020, the appellant has filed the appeal. The authority observed that the adjudicating authority while issuing the SCN dated 29.10.2020 as well as in the order dated 17.11.2020, has properly mentioned/elaborated the reason for rejection of refund claim. Therefore, it is not justified to say that the adjudicating authority/proper officer has not been passed the speaking order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority rejected the appeal filed by the appellant.