New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday “Very urgent” of the GST Council to reconsider and tweak the refund formulas legally corrected the anomalies indicated by the applicant, who accused the refund formula causing different situations and industries between various businesses and industry.
sector.
Rejecting the Petitioner’s request to expand the category of refund by prescribing the sequence of utilization, judge Dy Chandrachud and Shah said that the exercise would take court “along the formula record and walk in executive shoes or walk legislative, which is not permitted”.
“Therefore, we will refrain from replacing the legislative wisdom or delegation with ourselves in such cases.
However, given the anomalies shown by the assessor, we strongly urge the GST council to reconsider the formula and make policy decisions regarding the same thing, “Said Justice Chandrachud, who wrote a 140-page verdict.
The bench said the refund formula is not ambiguous or cannot be carried out, it also does not oppose the legislative intention in providing limited refunds in the accumulation of input tax credits that are not used (ITC).
Parliament, while enforcing the CENTER, 2017 CENTER OF TAX AND JAVING, has included provisions for tax returns in Section 54.
Sub-section (3) realize the provisions for ITC returns that are not diarrhanded in cases involving: (i) inventory made without tax payments; and (ii) credit accumulation “because the tax rate for input is higher than the tax rate for the supply of output”.
While imagining a refund in the last two situations above, parliament imagine a particular situation where credit has accumulated because of the reverse task structure, that is, where the accumulation of ITC is due to the tax rate for input higher than the tax rate on the output inventory.
Taking legislative records about this situation, the provisions for refunds have been provided in section 54 (3), said bench.
Judge Chandrachud said, “There are no constitutional rights to find refunds.”