The adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant and held that the appellant has already filed their refund claim for the period and filed again physically for the same period as revised claim. This court do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority.
Refund— In the instant case, the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant and held that the appellant has already filed their refund claim for the period October-2017 to December-2017 online and for the period of December-2017 for Rs. 1,77,03,367/- and filed again physically for the same period as revised claim.
Whereas, as per condition (b) of Circular No.110/29/2019-GST dated 03.10.2019 that "No refund claims in Form GST RFD-01A/RFD-01 must have been filed by the registered person under the same category for any subsequent period".
Held that— Thus, appellant has not satisfied the condition (b) of the said circular. I do not find force in the contention of the appellant. They are not eligible for refund and I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority.
The adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant and held that the appellant has already filed their refund claim for the period and filed again physically for the same period as revised claim. This court do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority.
Refund— In the instant case, the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant and held that the appellant has already filed their refund claim for the period October-2017 to December-2017 online and for the period of December-2017 for Rs. 1,77,03,367/- and filed again physically for the same period as revised claim.
Whereas, as per condition (b) of Circular No.110/29/2019-GST dated 03.10.2019 that "No refund claims in Form GST RFD-01A/RFD-01 must have been filed by the registered person under the same category for any subsequent period".
Held that— Thus, appellant has not satisfied the condition (b) of the said circular. I do not find force in the contention of the appellant. They are not eligible for refund and I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority.