Goods and Services Tax : The updated Annexure B utility has introduced strict validation checks, mandatory JSON uploads, and automated GST refund processin...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN has made offline Annexure-B filing mandatory for specified GST refund claims with invoice-wise validation through GSTR-2B. Th...
Goods and Services Tax : GST authorities have strengthened reconciliation checks, invoice validation, and ITC scrutiny for export refunds from 01-04-2026. ...
Goods and Services Tax : The article argues that refunds arising from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mohit Minerals fall squarely within the proviso to Se...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN has replaced manual Annexure-B filing with a JSON-based automated validation utility linked directly to Form RFD-01. The new ...
Goods and Services Tax : The representation highlights ambiguity in whether the ₹2.5 crore ITC threshold should be annual or cumulative. It emphasizes th...
Goods and Services Tax : CBI arrests Superintendent of Central GST & Central Excise in Berhampur for accepting Rs. 15,000 bribe from complainant regarding ...
Goods and Services Tax : While filing Annual Return GSTR-4, if composition taxpayers have deposited excess tax, they will now be able to file for GST refu...
Goods and Services Tax : Processing of Refund application of tax amount of more than Rs 2 Crore:- All the refund applications where the applicant has cl...
Goods and Services Tax : Important GST Update IFSC of below 8 banks are changed due to merger. Taxpayers may update their Bank Account details through non-...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court held that refund rejection orders must contain specific findings and proper reasoning. Since the appellate authorit...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court ruled that refund claims under inverted duty structure cannot be restricted using the earlier anomalous formula once Rul...
Goods and Services Tax : The applicant sought clarity on refund eligibility after filing NIL claims but later withdrew the application citing procedural co...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that the 2-year time limit under Section 54 is mandatory and binding on authorities. However, delay can be condoned...
Goods and Services Tax : The SC declined to interfere with the High Courts order granting IGST refund despite return filing error. It upheld that refund ca...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN resolved a technical issue for QRMP taxpayers on the GST Portal. Refund applications can now be filed, provided GSTR-3B for r...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about recent GSTN changes for refund filing on service exports with tax, SEZ supplies with tax, and deemed export supplier r...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN announces changes to the refund process for deemed export recipients, removing chronological filing and modifying the refund ...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn how exporters can claim refund of additional IGST paid due to price increases post-export. Details on application process an...
Goods and Services Tax : Circular No. 226/20/2024-GST outlines a procedure for refunding additional IGST paid due to upward price revisions post-export. Le...
The SC rejected the State’s challenge citing an unexplained 676-day delay and found no reason to interfere with the High Court’s refund order. The High Court’s direction to process the original refund claim remained effective.
The High Court held that contradictory portal communications and missing rejection orders cannot defeat a refund claim. The original refund application was ordered to be honoured with interest.
The court addressed denial of a GST refund arising from repeated deficiency memos on a leasehold transfer. It held that the refund must be processed promptly upon application, reinforcing accountability of tax authorities.
Courts have held that the two-year limit under Section 54 is not mandatory in all cases. Where the refund claim is genuine, bonafide, and causes no revenue loss, procedural delay cannot defeat substantive rights.
Authorities erred in treating direct consultancy services as intermediary supplies. The ruling confirms refunds where the supplier provides the main service on its own account.
The issue was whether refunds can be averaged across months. The key takeaway is that IDS refunds are strictly tax-period specific under GST law.
The Court set aside the refund rejection holding that software services exported to a foreign parent cannot be treated as intermediary services. The ruling directs release of the denied GST refund with interest.
The authority rejected the refund citing non-submission of LUT before export. The court found that the clarification allowing ex post facto LUT was ignored and ordered reconsideration.
This explains how non-realisation of export proceeds within FEMA timelines leads to GST refund reversal and interest liability. The key takeaway is that exporters must track realisation deadlines proactively to avoid automatic tax exposure.
The Court held that refund rights accrued before the 2019 amendment to Section 54 cannot be taken away retrospectively. The key takeaway is that limitation changes cannot extinguish vested GST refund rights.
