Page 92 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

538 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 538 (Appellate Authority - A.P.)

BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER GST,
ANDHRA PRADESH
Smt. P. Vaishnavi, Joint Commissioner (ST) & Appellate Authority (ST)
IN RE : VAACHI INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.

Order No. 4990/2020, dated 10-2-2020 in Appeal No. APL1900232
Refund of unutilized input tax credit - Zero-rated supplies made to
SEZ - SEZ unit/developers not eligible to claim refund against ITC involved in
supplies received by them from non-SEZ suppliers, eligibility for refund claim
being available to suppliers who made zero-rated supplies to SEZ
units/Developers with payment of tax - Accordingly, refund claim filed by ap-
pellant-SEZ rejected - Section 54(3) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act,
2017 read with Rules 89(1) and 89(2)(f) of Central Goods and Services Tax
Rules, 2017. [para 21]
Appeal dismissed
[Order]. - This is an appeal filed by M/s. Vaachi International Pvt. Ltd.,
Trading Unit No. 3/8, VSEZ, Duvvada, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter referred to
as ‘Appellant’) against the tax orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST),
Gajuwaka Circle, Visakhapatnam Division (hereinafter referred to as ‘Assessing
Authority’/for short ‘A.A.’) for the tax periods from July, 2017 to March, 2018
under CGST/APGST Act, 2017 in GSTIN : 37AABCV5897L1ZH vide his orders
dated 2-5-2019, disputing the rejection of refund of Rs. 20,97,104/-.
2. The case is posted for hearing details are as under :

Sl. No. Date of notice issued Posted for hearing date Status of hearing
1. 4-10-2019 28-10-2019 Not Attended
2. 6-11-2019 16-11-2019 Not Attended
3. 26-11-2019 (final) 19-12-2019 Attended

3. Sri Manish Goel, Chartered Accountant and Authorized Representa-
tive of the firm (hereinafter referred to as ‘A.R.’) has appeared on earlier occasion
and finally on 19-12-2019 for arguing the case. Finally, the appeal was heard by
the Appellate Authority.
Statement of facts :
4. The appellant is an assessee on the rolls of the AA and doing the
business export of Dried Ornamental Plant materials.
5. The AA recorded in his refund rejection order that on examination of
appellant’s refund claim under Section 54 read with Rule 89 of (CGST/SGST)
GST Act, 2017, it was identified by him that the appellant is not eligible for re-
fund of ITC, because such eligibility is available to the taxpayers who made zero
rated supplies to SEZ units/Developers with payment of tax.
6. The AA further stated that 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 duplicity of the claims, as there may be a situation where the SEZ Unit gets
GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  92