Goods and Services Tax : The article explains that GST refunds depend on correct statutory classification, documentation, and timelines. It highlights that...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn the statutory framework governing GST refunds under Section 54 of the CGST Act, including eligibility, filing procedures, do...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi High Court held that the amended limitation provision under Section 54 cannot be applied retrospectively to deny refund ...
Goods and Services Tax : Section 54(3) permits refund of unutilised ITC for zero-rated supplies and inverted duty structures. The key takeaway is that refu...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN has permanently removed PDF-based Annexure-B filing for ITC refund claims and made the Excel-based Offline Utility compulsory...
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 : Orissa HC held that refund cannot be refused merely because the State might appeal, where no appeal or proceeding was pending on t...
Goods and Services Tax : The Bombay High Court held that the 2019 amendment to Section 54(1) of the GST Act applies prospectively and does not govern refun...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi High Court ruled that the amendment restricting Explanation 2(e) applies prospectively and cannot take away vested refund ri...
Goods and Services Tax : The Telangana High Court declined to examine the merits of GST refund rejection orders and directed the taxpayer to avail the stat...
Goods and Services Tax : The Tribunal held that procurement strategy, supplier oversight, and sourcing support formed part of a substantive procurement ser...
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...
Export refunds often get delayed due to GSTN-ICEGATE data mismatches. This guide explains error codes and corrective steps to unlock your IGST refund.
The Supreme Court held that refund of GST collected and passed on to consumers must be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. It ruled that courts cannot create alternative refund mechanisms outside Section 54 of the CGST Act.
The court accepted an undertaking to decide a pending GST refund within four weeks and flagged interest liability for prolonged delay under the CGST Act.
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.
