Page 60 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

J118 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
Now, exporters are having to deal with queries from tax officials while
seeking refunds.
“This has been a matter of concern for exporters, especially given their
experience of field officers insisting on compliance of all circulars before issuance
of any refunds,” said Abhishek Jain, Tax Partner at EY.
“For speedy processing of these refunds, the government should consid-
er extending a relaxation on the matching of credits or an option of provisional
refunds for the interim period to mitigate working capital concerns for the ex-
porters,” he said.
The Government circular specifically mentioned that Input Tax Credit
refunds should not be granted on invoices that are not reflected in GSTR-2A—a
form that reflects outward supply invoices uploaded by suppliers.
Now, GSTR-2A is auto-created information based on GSTR-1 — a
monthly statement of outward supplies of goods or services filed by a company.
The Government has waived late fee for filing forms such as GSTR-1 due
to Covid-19 situation. While this was a step in the right direction, due to this the
corresponding invoices — which exporters submit to claim refunds — are not
reflected in GSTR-2A, experts said.
Hence, exporters are unable to avail tax credits, they said.
[Source : https://economictimes.indiatimes.com, dated 20-7-2020]

HC stays NAA order to Reckitt to deposit in consumer fund
` 63 lakh profiteered from Dettol handwash
The Delhi High Court on 20-7-2020 stayed the National Anti-profiteering
Authority (NAA) order directing Pharma major Reckitt Benckiser to deposit in
the Consumer Welfare Fund over ` 63 lakh it allegedly profiteered from the sale
of Dettol handwash between 2017 to 2019.
Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw made it clear the stay would come into opera-
tion only if the Pharma Major Deposits the amount with NAA within two weeks.
The March 19, 2020 order of the NAA, apart from directing deposit of the
amount, had also asked Reckitt Benckiser to show cause why penalty be not im-
posed upon it in accordance with the provisions of the Central Goods and Ser-
vices Tax (CGST) Act.
The Court said the NAA may commence proceedings pursuant to the
show cause notice issued by it, but any final order imposing penalty on the
Pharma major would not be given effect to till further orders in the petition.
The Court also issued notice to the Ministry of Finance, NAA and the Di-
rector General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), represented by Central Government
Standing Counsel Ravi Prakash and Advocate Farman Ali Magray, seeking their
stand on the plea by August, 24.
The DGAP, in its investigation, had found that Reckitt Benckiser had be-
GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  60
( A118 )