GSTAT Order
  1. Home
  2. GSTAT Order

SGST Tribunal

GST - Section 16(2) of CGST Act, 2017 - Refund of Accumulated Input Tax Credit on export of goods - Validity of Supply Chain in the absence of Toll Plaza Movement receipts – Cancelled second-level supplier in Bill-to-Ship-to Model - Respondent claimed refund of accumulated ITC. Adjudicating Authority rejected refund claiming discrepancies in inward supply chain including non-crossing of vehicles through toll gates in declared dispatch State, procurement of goods from second-level suppliers with cancelled registrations, and possible illegal transactions in regulated petroleum commodity – Appellate Authority allowed refund and set aside adjudication order - Revenue preferred appeals before GSTAT - Whether toll plaza receipts are mandatory for proving physical movement of goods and whether ITC can be denied for supply chain deficiencies and procedural discrepancies - HELD – The Toll plaza receipts are not mandatory requirement under GST law for proving actual physical movement of goods and transportation. Section 16 of CGST Act only prescribes receipt of goods, valid tax invoice, E-way Bill and payment of tax as conditions for ITC eligibility. Where respondent has produced valid transportation documents including E-way Bills, bilty copies, tax invoices, shipping bills, Export General Manifest, transporter certificates etc, toll plaza data alone cannot override substantive documentary evidence of actual supply and movement – Further, there is no provision in the GST law that the goods should necessarily start from the registered place of the supplier. The supplier shall supply the goods as per the instructions of the receiver/ exporter to the place of export in Bill-To-Ship-To Model - The respondent has complied all the conditions under clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (2) of Section 16 and eligible to ITC – The Revenue appeals are dismissed - Validity of denial of ITC on ground of cancellation of GST registration of the second line of suppliers – HELD - The ITC cannot be denied based on cancellation of registrations of second-level suppliers when direct supplier's registration is active and valid - The actual supplier having valid registration and still exists in the GST portal. There is no connection between the respondent and the second line of suppliers. The respondent is not liable for any kind of irregularity committed by the second-level suppliers - Raising of additional grounds first time before the Tribunal – HELD - Merely on the basis of information given before the Appellate stage and without any prayer for additional evidence cannot be allowed. The Rule 45(1) of GSTAT (Procedure) Rules 2025 and Rule 112(1) of CGST Rules, 2017 bar the additional evidence to be recorded except in exceptional circumstances – The new grounds and allegations raised by Revenue for first time before GSTAT stage including licensing requirements for bitumen, investigation by DGGI, and allegations of similar modus operandi are additional evidence barred under Rule 45(1) of GSTAT Procedure Rules 2025 and Rule 112(1) of CGST Rules 2017 - Respondent has complied with all conditions under Section 16(2) of CGST Act for ITC eligibility.
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST Critical issues: ITC on...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?