Page 107 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

2020 ] IN RE : VAACHI INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. 553
is on account of supply of goods or services made to a Special Economic
Zone unit or a Special Economic Zone developer.”
Thus the facility of getting refund of tax paid is statutorily made available
to those taxpayers who made supplies to SEZ only, with payment of tax.
This is to ensure that the refund of tax paid is claimed only by the suppliers
to SEZ, on filing of declarations from their [SEZ] purchasers, to avoid du-
plicity of the claims, as there may be a situation where the SEZ unit gets
supplies of goods/services from multiple number of Vendor taxpayers,
spread over different places, and it is not possible for the department to
track their refund claims, against the supplies made to such SEZ unit, with
payment of tax. Therefore, the contention of the taxpayer that the SEZ unit
can also make refund claim against the zero-rated supplies made without
payment of tax, is not tenable.
3. As per the provisions cited above, we conclude that we are eligible for
the refund claimed.
In reply to the objection 3, it is submitted that for the aforesaid reasons, it is
respectfully submitted that the appeal is devoid of any merits and accord-
ingly it is prayed that the Hon’ble Appellate Deputy Commissioner may be
pleased to dismiss the appeal or to pass such further or other orders fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case.
Discussion :
13. Perused the grounds of appeal vis-a-vis the impugned orders
passed by the assessing authority i.e. A.A.
14. The appellant primarily put forth that the rejection of refund claim
is in violation of natural justice and against the facts of the case. The appellant
also contended that, it is not correct that Refund claim filed by the appellant has
been rejected solely on the ground that as per Section 54(3)(i) read with Rule
89(2)(f) of the GST Law (APGST Act, CGST Act), the provisions for refund of un-
utilized input tax is available to only those taxpayer who made supplies to SEZ
Unit or the Developer.
15. The appellant also put forth Section 16, professing that their sup-
plies are definitely falls under zero-rated supply under Section 16(1)(b). The ap-
pellant also advanced that they have claimed refund under “Refund of TTC on
Export of Goods and Services without payment of Integrated Tax”. Since the ap-
pellant is involved in zero-rated supplies made without payment of tax, they are
eligible for refund as per Section 54(3) of Central goods and Services Tax Act,
2017 cited above.
16. The appellant also pointed out that prior to amendment wherein it
was mentioned that suppliers to SEZ need to give declaration from the SEZ unit
that the SEZ unit has not claimed input tax credit and this sub-rule makes it clear
that the SEZ unit can claim input tax credit and the option to claim refund of tax
is open to both the SEZ unit and the supplier to the SEZ unit.
Issues for adjudication :
17. Whether the rejection of refund claim by the AA, is in tune with the
provisions of (CGST/SGST) APGST Act, 2017 or not?
Analysis :
18. Perused the grounds of appeal along with the assessment orders
GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  107