Page 109 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

2020 ] IN RE : VAACHI INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. 555
(b) the supplier of deemed export supplies in cases where the re-
cipient does not avail of input tax credit on such supplies and
furnishes an undertaking to the effect that the supplier may
claim the refund] :
Provided also that refund of any amount, after adjusting the tax payable by
the applicant out of the advance tax deposited by him under section 27 at
the time of registration, shall be claimed in the last return required to be
furnished by him.
Rule 89(2)(f) :
The application under sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by any of the fol-
lowing documentary evidences in Annexure-1 in FORM GST RFD-01, as
applicable, to establish that a refund is due to the applicant, namely :-
a declaration to the effect that tax has not been collected from the
Special Economic Zone unit or the Special Economic Zone develop-
er, in a case where the refund is on account of supply of goods or
services or both made to a Special Economic Zone unit or a Special
Economic Zone developer.”
20. On comprehending the Rule 89(1), the second proviso unambigu-
ously stipulates that in respect of supplies to SEZ units/developers, the refund
“SHALL” be claimed by suppliers of goods to the SEZ unit or developer only.
Further, Rule 89(2)(f) prescribes that SEZ unit/developers shall not avail input
tax credit on the supplies received by them from non SEZ suppliers and refund
would be claimed by supplier to SEZ unit/developer only.
21. Thus, a conjoint reading of all the above provisions undoubtedly
point towards a conclusion that SEZ unit/developers shall not claim any refund
against the ITC involved in supplies received by them from non SEZ suppliers.
The Act facilitates eligibility for refund claim to the suppliers who made supplies
to SEZ unit/developers with payment of tax. The AA has rightly adhered to the-
se provisions and rejected the refund claim in legitimate manner. In addition to
this, it is to be observed that the appellant contentions of their eligibility regard-
ing refund against the zero-rated supplies received by them, is found to be not
tenable.
Conclusion :
22. In view of the above emerged findings and discussed circumstanc-
es, it is to be held that the refund eligibility claim by the appellant is not in tune
with the provisions of Act and the AA has precisely rejected such refund claim
duly observing the provisions of the Act. So the rejection of refund by AA need
not be interfered with and to be upheld as legitimate, and the appeal is dismissed
by confirming the tax so levied by the assessing authority.
Result of the Appeal :
23. In the result, the levy of refund reject by the assessing authority, are
confirmed, and the appeal stands dismissed.

_______

GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  109