Page 16 - GSTL_27th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 4

xiv GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 39
Entry No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate) for each and every
work — In Re : Atal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Good Governance & Policy Analysis
(A.A.R. - GST - M.P.) .................................. 430
Quantification of disputed amount payable under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy
Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - See under SABKA VISHWAS
(LEGACY DISPUTE RESOLUTION) SCHEME, 2019 .............. 393
Question of general nature, AAR has no jurisdiction - See under ADVANCE
RULING AUTHORITY ............................... 439
Rate of GST on animal feed supplement namely Shatamrut Chyavan - See
under SHATAMTRUT CHYAVAN ........................ 430
— on customized furniture supplied and installed in premises of
Government Department - See under COMPOSITE SUPPLY .......... 422
— on Preparation of a kind used in Animal Feeding - Bio Processed Meal -
See under PREPARATION ............................. 446
Rectification of error apparent in Advance Ruling, scope of - See under
ERROR APPARENT IN ADVANCE RULING .................. 446
REFUND/REFUND CLAIM :
— of fee paid on filing advance ruling application with wrong State
Authority not possible - See under ADVANCE RULING APPLICATION ... 403
— under GST - Acknowledgement - Admittedly, till date the petitioner’s
refund application dated 4th November, 2019 not processed -
Acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 or any deficiency memo not
being issued in RFD-03 within timeline of fifteen days, refund application
presumed to be complete in all respects in accordance with sub-rules (2),
(3) and (4) of Rule 89 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules,
2017/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - Respondent cannot to
be allowed to issue a deficiency memo today as it would allow them to
process refund application beyond the statutory timelines as provided
under Rule 90 ibid and could be construed as rejection of the petitioner’s
initial application for refund - All relevant documents annexed with the
present writ petition and respondent satisfied about their authenticity -
Consequently, respondent lost the right to point out any deficiency, in
the petitioner’s refund application, at this belated stage - Accordingly,
Respondent directed to pay to the petitioner the refund along with
interest in accordance with law within two weeks - Section 54 of Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act,
2017 — Jian International v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax (Del.) ....... 385
Research works for Government entity, exemption admissible - See under
PURE SERVICES .................................. 430
Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - Disputed Tax
Amount payable thereunder - Quantification of - Prima facie,
quantification of disputed amount payable as done by designated
Committee in impugned order in SVLDRS-3 Form, is incorrect inasmuch
as amount of deposits made during investigations have not been
deducted on the ground of it being accepted liability whereas petitioner
had resorted to appeal proceedings against entire SCN - Further, said
quantification has been done without hearing petitioners - Accordingly,
impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded to Committee for
redetermination of amount in accordance with legal provisions - Since
last date for deposit of amount under scheme ibid is ending today on
GST LAW TIMES  27th August 2020  16