Thursday, October 8, 2015

GST Refund Processes Situations


Also Read
GST Refund Processes Introduction
GST REFUND Forms, Time Period, Supporting Documents, Sanction Etc.,


In the taxation administration, refund refers to any amount that is due to the tax payer from the tax administration. In the present taxation system it is considered as a strained area, both for the taxpayer and the tax administration. So in order to establish an effective and efficient tax administration system it is essential that issues on which refund arises ought to be kept at minimum and be clearly defined in the law. Since GST is going to subsume many of the existing taxation laws such as Central Excise, Service Tax, VAT, CST, etc., the situations under which refund arise under these laws are as follows:
    1. Excess payment of tax due to mistake or inadvertence.
    2. Export (including deemed export) of goods / services under claim of rebate or Refund of accumulated input credit of duty / tax when goods / services are exported. 
    3. Finalization of provisional assessment. 
    4. Refund of Pre – deposit for filing appeal including refund arising in pursuance of an appellate authority’s order (when the appeal is decided in favor of the appellant). 
    5. Payment of duty / tax during investigation but no/ less liability arises at the time of finalization of investigation / adjudication. 
    6. Refund of tax payment on purchases made by Embassies or UN bodies. 
    7. Credit accumulation due to output being tax exempt or nil-rated. 
    8. Credit accumulation due to inverted duty structure i.e. due to tax rate differential between output and inputs. 
    9. Year-end or volume based incentives provided by the supplier through credit notes. 
    10. Tax Refund for International Tourists
    Each of the situations mentioned above are being discussed hereunder individually for better appreciation of the issue and the proposed process to handle them under the proposed GST regime:

    1. EXCESS PAYMENT OF TAX DUE TO MISTAKE OR INADVERTENTCE : 

    As the heading suggests, it refers to the situations where the tax payer has made excess payment of tax either by mistake or by inadvertence resulting in more payment of tax than due to the Government. Since the tax that has been paid is in excess, which was actually not required to be paid, the same should be refunded to the taxpayer.

    Such excess payment may be on account of:-
      1. Wrong mention of nature of tax (CGST / SGST / IGST),
      2. Wrong mention of GSTIN, or 
      3. Wrong mention of tax amount.
      In first two situations i.e. in case of wrong mention of nature of tax (CGST / SGST / IGST) or in case of wrong mention of GSTIN, the tax administration is required to verify the correctness of the taxpayer’s claim and therefore the taxpayer may file a refund application which should be decided within a period to be prescribed by the GST Law.

      A dealer is required to make tax payment on two accounts i.e. payment linked to a return or payment in response to a specific demand arising out of audit, etc. The IT system should be in a position to make a distinction between these two type of payment. Perhaps the payment challan may have a field to select the purpose of payment.


      The GST Law Drafting Committee / Payment Committee may decide as to whether the payment is to be made tax period wise or a system of Personal Ledger Account (PLA) is to be used. Maharashtra has suggested that Kerala model of return cum challan may also be examined by the GST Law Drafting Committee / Payment Committee.


      In the third situation i.e. where the amount has been mentioned wrongly, the refund of excess amount of tax, at the option of the taxpayer, would either be automatically carried forward for adjustment against future tax liabilities or be refunded on submission of application (return itself can be treated as a refund application) by the taxpayer. The automatic carry forward would be allowed if the excess payment was made against a return and not against any other liability. The GST Law may provide for automatic set off if the excess payment of tax is not on account of interpretation of notifications, application of exemptions etc., i.e. the excess payment is not on account of difference of opinion between the tax administration and the taxpayer. The GST Law may also lay down the time limit within which the excess amount of tax, as reflected in the return filed by a taxpayer for that relevant period, can be re- credited suomoto and can be utilized by the taxpayer for payment of future tax liability.


      The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.

      2. EXPORT (INCLUDING DEEMED EXPORT) OF GOODS / SERVICES UNDER CLAIM OF REBATE OR REFUND OF ACCUMULATED CREDIT OF TAX WHEN GOODS / SERVICES ARE EXPORTED :  

      The treatment for export of goods and services and that of deemed export would be different under GST regime because of their inherent nature. Therefore these are being discussed separately as follows:

      EXPORT OF GOODS : 
      • Presently under the Central Law, every exporter has three options available for neutralization of taxes paid on inputs used for export goods or taxes paid on finished goods exported by him which are delineated hereunder:
      1. Obtaining non duty paid inputs and exporting final product without payment of duty.
      2. Obtaining duty paid inputs and claiming refund of the same at the time of export of the finished goods without payment of duty.
      3. Obtaining duty paid inputs, availing the input tax credit thereon and exporting finished goods after payment of duty (after utilizing such input tax credit) and thereafter claiming the rebate of the duty paid on exported goods. 
      It was noted that in the proposed GST regime, exports are proposed to be Zero rated which means that the export goods would not suffer any actual tax liability although the inputs for them would be tax paid which would be subsequently neutralized. So there should be a mechanism whereby the GST paid on the inputs or on exported finished goods, either through cash or by utilization of input tax credit, is refunded to the exporter. This would serve two objectives simultaneously. On the one hand, the ITC chain through the various dealers will not be broken and on the other hand, the exporter of the finished goods will get the refund of the GST paid on the inputs or on finished goods thereby making the exports actually free from the burden of taxes. The system should be simple and efficient so that exporters do not experience any hassles while claiming refund of taxes. For this it is essential to devise a system based verification mechanism so that human intervention is reduced to the minimum.

      It is recommended that the first option mentioned above i.e. option to procure duty free inputs for exported goods should not be available in the GST regime. This would obviate the requirement of submission of statutory form and the supplier of goods to the actual exporter would be required to pay the GST and will not be required to comply with various formalities presently required for making tax free supplies.

      It is further recommended that other two options may be made available to the exporter in the proposed GST regime. It is recommended that GST Law drafting Committee may provide for the provision of rebate and the legality of the same will be examined at the time of vetting of the GST law by the Law Ministry.

      Since the process for payment of refund of GST paid on inputs (including input services) or payment of rebate of GST paid on finished goods is similar to a large extent, the same is being discussed here together. The following process is proposed for making this system as simple as possible:

      a) The IEC details of taxpayer will be captured at the time of issuance of GSTIN and the same can be verified online with DGFT for verifying the correctness of the exporter’s particulars.

      b) The refund of ITC / rebate of GST paid on exported goods may be granted on submission of application to this effect by the taxpayer.

      c) Since the trigger point for refund is export of goods, therefore the event of export needs to be verified (mostly online) so as to minimize cases of erroneous / fraudulent claims of refund / rebate.

      d) It is recommended that linkage between ICEGATE of Customs administration and the proposed GSTN of GST administration may be established so that online verification of the exports can be carried out. In any case such linkage has to be established to verify IGST paid at the time of import of goods / services. 

      e) It is also noted that, as per IGST Model, there is a requirement for online filing of invoice wise sale / purchase details by the taxpayers’ along with the monthly returns. These details can be linked with the Customs data (for export cases) available with ICEGATE.

      f) Normally for export verification the following documents are sought from the applicant :

      i. Shipping Bill (Export Promotion copy);
      ii. Mate’s Receipt / Transporter’s Challan (in case of export by road);
      iii. Export invoice;
      iv. Packing list;
      v. Bill of Lading/ Airway Bill;
      vi. Bank Realization Certificate (BRC). 

      g) Since it is proposed to establish linkage between ICEGATE and GSTN, therefore shipping bill,  which includes relevant details from the export invoice and packing list, can be verified online and there would not be any need for the exporter to submit the same. Further, Mate’s Receipt and Bill of Lading are the crucial documents that determine the occurrence of event of export, the exporter would be required to upload the scanned copies of the same with online refund application. As regards the BRC, it was noted that as per the RBI guidelines, the exporter has a time period of one year from the date of export, within which the export proceeds are required to be remitted into India. Thus BRC will not be available till the time export proceeds are realized. Therefore it is recommended that submission of BRC may not be insisted upon at the time of filing of refund application and post facto verification can be carried out by the tax authorities. The refund in such cases should be subject to submission of BRC details within a period of maximum one year or such period as extended by RBI from the date of the export. If such details are not submitted at the portal at which the refund application was made, the portal should generate an alert/report for the concerned tax authorities to take up appropriate action. In case of any short receipt of export receipts, necessary action for recovery of proportionate refunded amount may be taken accordingly.

      h) BRC, however, may be verified at the time of exports itself if the payment has already been received in advance. It is also recommended that e-BRC module may be integrated in the Refund process under GST.

      i) The time limit for filing of refund application is normally linked with the date of export and it is proposed that this time limit should be fixed at one year from the date of export. This date is the date on which the proper officer under the Customs Act gives an order for export of goods commonly known as “Let Export Order” (LEO). This date can also be verified online in view of the proposed linkage between ICEGATE and GSTN.

      j) Once the export is established, verification of the duty paid on the final products at the time of export is required to be carried out. For this, normally, copy of challans/ invoices evidencing duty payment are sought from the exporter and the same are verified manually by the jurisdictional authority. In the proposed GSTN, the payment of GST on exported goods can be verified online (as the sales invoices are required to be filed along with the monthly return) and there is no need for separate submission of these documents. Once the GST paid character of exported goods is established, refund can be sanctioned.

      k) In respect of refund claimed for GST paid on inputs (including input services) used for exported goods, once the export is established, verification of the GST paid on the inputs (including input services) as well as their utilization for the exports is required to be carried out. For this normally copy of invoices evidencing GST payment are sought from the exporter and the same are verified manually by the jurisdictional authority. Besides a declaration is filed by the applicant with the proper officer declaring inter alia input-output ratio for inputs on which refund is sought. In the proposed GST regime, the GST paid character of inputs (including input services) can be established online (as the purchase invoices are required to be filed along with the monthly return) and the refund of input tax credit on inputs (including input services) can be sanctioned once the input tax credit has been matched from the purchase and sale statements filed by the exporter and supplier respectively and there is no need for separate submission of these documents. As regards utilization of the inputs for exports, a simple formula can be adopted that will provide for proportionate credit based on export turnover divided by total turnover. Moreover, a declaration can be obtained from the exporter regarding utilization of inputs in the exported goods.

      EXPORT OF SERVICES :

      It is noted that in case of export of services there are no custom documents that can substantiate the occurrence of event of export as no shipping bill is required to be filed. Thus invoice and Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) are the only documents that can substantiate the occurrence of event of exports. It is, therefore, recommended that in the case of export of services, BRC would be required before sanction of the refund of GST paid on inputs (input services) / rebate of GST paid on exported services.

      It is further noted that the invoice and BRC are the crucial documents for filing of the refund application. Therefore the relevant date, in case of export of services, will be the date of invoice or the date of BRC, whichever is later. This will take care of the situation if the payment has already been received in advance. It is also recommended that e-BRC module may be integrated in the refund process under GST.

      It is suggested that since exports of services cannot be verified online through ICEGATE, there should be a separate application for refund of service exported.

      DEEMED EXPORT OF GOODS OR SERVICES : 


      It was noted that there is a concept of deemed export for situations listed in Chapter 8 of the Foreign Trade Policy. Supplier of domestically produced duty paid goods when supplied to EOUs / SEZs / Projects under International Competitive Bidding (ICB) / Mega Power Plants / World Bank Funded Projects can seek refund of terminal excise duty as also drawback of the duty paid on the inputs used in manufacture of such goods. However such refund is not permissible for VAT paid on such domestically supplied goods.

      It is recommended that the deemed export need to be treated on equal footing as export and the similar provision as detailed above for actual exports of goods or services would be applicable except the following:
      1. The supplier of final goods, in the course of deemed export, will pay the IGST on his supplies and can claim refund, only if, the IGST amount has not collected from the recipient. It is also required to be verified that the recipient has not availed the input tax credit in respect of such supplies.
      2. The supplier may file a simple refund application along with a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate certifying the fact of non-passing of the GST burden by him, being claimed as refund. GST Law Drafting Committee may prescribe a threshold amount below which self-certification (instead of CA Certificate) would be sufficient. 
      3. The recipient unit would be eligible for refund of IGST, if it has actually paid IGST at the time of obtaining goods / services from the domestic supplier. In no case, both the supplier and the recipient unit can obtain refund at the same time in respect of the same transaction. A suitable validation to block such double claim should be built in the GSTN /refund processing backend system. 
      4. Such recipients may not be registered under GST regime and therefore they would have to submit copies of all the invoices, etc. in case claim of refund is filed by them.
      It is also recommended that this recommendation may be specifically brought to the notice of EC as this is deviation from the present practice being followed by the States.

      GENERAL :


      It was suggested that as a thumb rule, up to 90% of the refund claimed by the taxpayer may be sanctioned automatically by the system. The balance amount of refund may be granted after completion of verification of documents / accounts to be done at the end of the financial year and to be completed within a period of three months. The issue was discussed and it is recommended that partial refund may not be allowed and entire refund claim may be sanctioned within the time limit laid down in the GST Law.

      It was noted that there may be certain goods on which Customs Export Duty may be leviable. It is recommended that in such cases refund of ITC of GST paid on inputs (including input services) used for such exported goods may not be admissible.

      Requirement of BRC for sanction of refund in respect of export of services and as a post facto verification in case of export of goods may be provided in the GST Law.

      It was noted that the exports would be treated as inter-state supplies and therefore IGST would be required to be paid by the taxpayer in cases GST is paid at the time of export. Refund of such IGST would have to be paid by the Centre. In case of refund of GST paid on inputs (including input services) used for exported goods, the refund of CGST, SGST or IGST may arise and the same needs to be paid by the respective tax administration. A suitable validation to block use of same tax invoices for more than one refund claim should be built in the GSTN /refund processing backend system.

      It was further noted that the principle of unjust enrichment is not applicable in case of actual export of goods or services as the recipient is located outside the taxable territory. In case of deemed exports, however, the concept is applicable.

      It is further recommended that the amount of input tax credit claimed as refund may be blocked at the time of time of submission of application for refund itself. And if the refund claim is rejected wholly or partially the rejected portion of the ITC claim amount will be restored in the ITC ledger of the applicant.

      3. FINALIZATION OF PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT :

      As discussed in Para No. (I) below, the issues relating to provisional assessment being presently followed by Central Tax Authorities would be handled by the system of issuance of debit and credit notes, therefore refund may not arise in such cases. The process has been delineated here under, if the GST Law provides for continuance of the system of provisional assessment:
      1. In the proposed GST regime the returns of the taxpayer will be electronically filed. In the return itself there should be a field for indicating whether the tax being paid is provisional or final. In case the tax has been paid on provisional basis, there should be a drop box that would indicate the reasons for which the tax has been paid on provisional basis.
      2. Once such a return comes up before the assessing officer and if he agrees with the reason mentioned by the taxpayer, the return / assessment may be kept provisional.
      3. Thereafter the return may be taken up for finalization once the issue involved in provisional assessment is settled. GST law may prescribe time period for finalization i.e. 90 days and this time line should not be breached, as far as possible.
      4. At the time of finalization of the return / assessment by the assessing officer, a speaking order may be issued which will also mention the amount that the taxpayer is required to pay or is eligible for refund. 
      5. The refund would be granted only if the incidence of GST paid by him has not been passed on to the consumer (the concept of unjust enrichment). This issue would be examined by the assessing officer at the time of finalization of assessment.
      6. The model GST Law may provide for appropriate provisions relating to the principle of unjust enrichment.
      7. For satisfying the requirement of unjust enrichment, the taxpayer would be required to submit a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate certifying the fact of non-passing of the GST burden by the taxpayer, being claimed as refund. GST Law Drafting Committee may prescribe a  threshold amount below which self certification (instead of CA Certificate) would be sufficient. This would also settle the issue of ITC that would have been claimed by the purchaser on the basis of the provisional tax paid by the taxpayer as ITC would have to be reversed by the recipient before sanction of refund to the supplier.
      8. The differential amount claimed as refund will be reflected in the return for the month in which the finalization takes place.
      9. The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.

      4. REFUND OF PRE – DEPOSIT FOR FILING APPEAL INCLUDING REFUND ARISING IN PURSUANCE OF AN APPELLATE AUTHORITY’S ORDER
       : 

      Refund arising in pursuance of appellate authority’s order is another  area that has been subject of judicial scrutiny and strictures. The following process is recommended in order to make this process streamlined, efficient and in line with the judicial decisions on the matter:

      1. Looking at the policy objective of making the refund process hassle free, it is recommended that the taxpayer may file a simple refund application along with a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate certifying the fact of non-passing of the GST burden by the taxpayer, being claimed as refund. As mentioned earlier, the GST Law Drafting Committee may prescribe a threshold amount below which self certification (instead of CA Certificate) would be sufficient.
      2. The refund may not be kept in abeyance if the appellate authority’s order (in pursuance of which refund arises) is appealed against at the next higher appellate forum unless the jurisdictional authority has obtained a stay from the higher appellate authority against the operation of the appellate authority’s order in pursuance of which refund has arisen. This position may be appropriately reflected in the GST Law itself so that any ambiguity on this issue can be avoided and the tax administrations are made more accountable for early action in case of such refunds.
      3. GST Law may provide for certain predefined period during which refund may not be granted which can be regarded as the mandatory waiting period for the outcome of the appeal / application for stay.
      4. GST Law Drafting Committee may also consider for providing powers to jurisdictional authority at sufficiently senior level for withholding the refund in exceptional cases on the condition that interest at appropriate rate has to be paid.
      5. The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.

      5. PAYMENT OF DUTY/TAX DURING INVESTIGATION BUT NO / LESS LIABILITY ARISES AT THE TIME OF FINALIZATION OF INVESTIGATION / ADJUDIACTION :

      Presently the Central Law (State Laws do not have similar provision) does not debar suo-motto payments during investigation / audit without issuance of a formal show cause notice / demand. If the GST Law does not debar such payments during investigation / audit process and ultimately no / less demand arises vis-à-vis amount already paid, then refund of such amount may be handled as per the procedure given below:
      1. A separate mechanism for the accounting of such payments has to be designed.  
      2. Refund in such cases requires utmost attention as such amount of tax paid during investigation, etc. become non leviable once the investigation is finalized and / or an adjudication order in favor of the taxpayer is issued. Therefore this process should be simple and hassle free.
      3. As soon as the investigation, etc. is over which does not lead to issuance of a show cause notice or where after investigation, show cause notice is issued but the adjudication order is in favor of the taxpayer i.e. where the demand of duty is dropped in full or in part, the taxpayer should be immediately eligible to claim refund of the amount that is found to have been paid in excess during investigation, etc.
      4. Looking at the policy objective of making the refund process hassle free, it is recommended that the taxpayer may file a simple refund application along with a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate certifying the fact of non-passing of the GST burden by him, being claimed as refund. GST Law Drafting Committee may prescribe a threshold amount below which self certification (instead of CA Certificate) would be sufficient.
      5. However, as every adjudication order can potentially be appealed against, the model GST Law may provide for a time limit after which only the refund can be sanctioned either by cash or by adjustment order at the option of the tax payer by the jurisdictional officers. This time limit should be concurrent with the time limit available for filing of an appeal so that department has time to file an appeal along with stay application, if any against adjudication order.
      6. Refund may be withheld only if the department has obtained a stay order on the operation of the adjudication order, failing which, refund has to be allowed. 
      7. The GST Law Drafting Committee may also consider for providing powers to jurisdictional authority at sufficiently senior level for withholding the refund in exceptional cases on the condition that interest at appropriate rate has to be paid.
      8. The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.

      6. REFUND OF TAX PAYMENT ON PURCHASE BY UN BODIES, SUPPLIES TO CSD CANTEENS, PARA MILITARY FORCES CANTEENS, ETC. :


      Presently the UN bodies are eligible for refund of taxes paid by them at the time of purchases made by them from the market. GST Law may provide for similar provision and in such a case, the following process for grant of refund is recommended:
      1. Refund on purchases by UN Bodies may be granted from only one office each of both the tax administrations within one State.
      2. UN Bodies may be assigned a unique identification number (ID) the structure of which would be uniform across the States in conformity with the GSTIN Structure. (Some other structure may have to be considered as such bodies do not have PAN) 
      3. The registration document, return document and invoice would contain a column for capturing this Unique ID. 
      4. There has to be a separate field for allotting ID to such bodies. 
      5. While making supplies to such bodies, the suppliers must indicate the Unique ID on the invoices.
      6. The UN Bodies may file their purchase statements (without purchase invoices) along with their claim for refund. 
      7. The GST Law may provide that some purchases are ineligible for refund (e.g. invoice value less than the prescribed threshold,  goods / services specified as ineligible for refund, etc.). Such cases should be specifically marked in the purchase statement or may not be included in the purchase statement.
      8. The net claim will be related to GST paid on total purchases minus GST paid on ineligible purchases. The IT system will carry out the matching with the sales statements of the counter party suppliers. 
      9. The matched and claimed to be eligible invoices will be seen by the jurisdictional authority to verify that none of the ineligible purchases have been included in the refund claim. 
      10. The refund may be granted based on the matching and the limited manual verification. 
      11. There might be situations when the supplier does not declare the supply in his monthly return. In such a case, unmatched invoices will get marked by the IT system and the supplier will be notified accordingly. 
      12. The UN body may be granted refund along with its next claim if any of the unmatched supplies have been accepted and related GST has been paid by the supplier and return has been filed subsequently. 
      13. The personal purchases by the staff may also be done seeking ID of the UN body on the invoice. 
      14. Such invoices in the statement can be marked as “for personal consumption” for any additional verification in case of any restriction under the GST Law. 
      15. GST Law Drafting Committee may provide for appropriate provisions whether refund has to be given for the personal purchases by the staff of UN bodies and Embassies. Such provisions may also relate to limits or restrictions, if any on such refunds.  
      It is recommended that the suppliers to CSD Canteens, Para Military Canteens would not be eligible for exemption. The procedure as detailed above would apply in respect of supplies to CSD Canteens, Para Military Forces canteens etc. and these bodies would claim refund.

      Form of application for refund which may be used by such bodies is enclosed as Annexure-VII to this document.

      The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.

      7. TAX CREDIT ON INPUTS USED FOR MANUFACTURING /GENERATION / PRODUCTION / CREATION OF TAX FREE SUPPLIES OR NON-GST SUPPLIES : 
      1. There would be certain goods or services which may be either exempted or NIL rated in GST regime. Further there may be certain goods or services which may not be brought under GST regime. Persons supplying such exempted / nil rated / non-GST goods or services would be receiving goods or services as their input supplies after payment of GST.
      2. The issue, whether such taxpayers are entitled to cash refund of the GST paid by them in respect of such input supplies (including input services or capital goods) which will be used for making supplies without payment of GST, was discussed at length.
      3. It is felt that the ITC is allowed to remove cascading and under modern VAT laws, tax is charged on value addition only and not on tax paid at the earlier level of supply chain. It is for this reason that the ultimate consumer is liable to bear the tax. Most State VAT administrations as well as Centre do not allow refund of ITC on inputs used for tax exempt / nil rated goods.
      4. Further the inputs (including input services or capital goods) received by such suppliers would become exempt if the refund is allowed to them, which is not intended by tax design.
      5. It is recommended that the model GST Law may provide that the suppliers of exempted / NIL rated / non GST goods or services would not be entitled to the ITC of GST paid on inputs (including input services or capital goods) received by them and consequently for refund of GST paid by them. In case of mixed supplies, ITC may be allowed proportionately.
      6. The tax credit on the inputs used for supply of exempted / NIL rated / non GST goods or services should be treated as “ineligible input tax credit” and there should be an appropriate provision in the return to provide the related invoice details.
      1. In addition to ineligible input tax credit arising from inputs used for supply of exempted / Nil rated / non-GST goods or services, there may be other types of ineligible input tax credits such as those related to specified capital goods / assets. It is recommended that the model GST law may provide for the full scope of such ineligible input tax credits.
      2. It is also recommended that such ineligible tax credit should accrue to the importing States in accordance with the Place of Supply Rules. This imperative will also apply to the inter-state supplies procured by the economic entities / government departments / public bodies supplying tax exempt / nil-rated / non-GST goods and services only. The mechanism for flow of such funds to the importing state by way of a system based apportionment in a consistent manner may be decided as a part of the return process.

      8. REFUND OF CARRY FORWARD INPUT TAX CREDIT : 



      As stated earlier, ITC is allowed to remove cascading and under modern VAT laws, tax is charged on value addition only and tax is not charged on tax. It is for this reason that the ultimate consumer is liable to bear the tax burden.

      It is noted that the ITC may accumulate on account of the following reasons :
      1. Inverted Duty Structure i.e. GST on output supplies is less than the GST on the input supplies;
      2. Stock accumulation; 
      3. Capital goods; and 
      4. Partial Reverse charge mechanism for certain services.

      As regards the accumulated ITC attributed to accumulation of stock or capital goods, it is recommended that GST Law may provide that refund of carried forward ITC may not be allowed and such amount would be carried forward to the next tax period (s). The GST Law may provide for appropriate provisions in this regard.


      Under the proposed GST law, it is proposed to have fewer tax rates and fewer exemptions and therefore it is felt that chances of inverted duty structure would not be there or would be very minimal. But still there might be a possibility that ITC may accumulate on account of inverted duty structure.


      It is recommended that in such case, cash refund may be granted after due audit and should be sanctioned only after the input tax credit has been matched from the purchase and sales statements filed along with monthly returns. The refund would be granted on submission of application. It may be mentioned, however, that presently the Centre does not grant refund in such cases.

      Two options i.e. blocking the utilization of input tax credit claimed as refund at the time of submission of application for refund itself or debiting the input tax credit account / cash ledger subject to the amount available in either account at the time of issuance of sanction order of refund were discussed. It is recommended that the first option should be adopted. Suitable linkage between the refund application and blocking of the “carry forward input tax credit” in the return/cash ledger should be built in GSTN and refund backend processing system.


      ITC may also accumulate on account of circumstances wherein liability to pay service tax is under Partial reverse Charge Mechanism. Presently the liability to pay service tax is either on the service provider or on service recipient or on both. The third category is popularly known as joint / partial reverse charge where both the service provider and the service recipient are liable to pay the service tax.


      In case of partial reverse charge, service provider may be left with unutilized balance in the input credit account as he is not liable to discharge the tax liability in full. In such cases, refund may be granted if the GST law provides for a joint reverse charge mechanism.


      The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.


      9. REFUND ON ACCOUNT OF YEAR END OR VOLUME BASED INCENTIVES PROVIDED BY THE SUPPLIER THROUGH C REDIT NOTES : 


      It is noted that suppliers are allowing year end or volume based discounts through credit notes. Such practice is being misused by the trade where the downstream dealers show negative value-additions. Some States have placed restrictions on such ITC. It is felt that the GST Law may provide for suitable provisions in this regard as provisions for such discounts is a trade practice and will have to be permitted in the  GST regime. The following procedure is recommended:
      1. The refund would be granted on submission of a simple application along with a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate certifying the fact of non-passing of the GST burden by the taxpayer, being claimed as refund. The GST Law Drafting Committee may prescribe a threshold amount below which self-certification (instead of CA Certificate) would be sufficient.
      2. In such cases, the eligibility for ITC at the buyer’s end and the output liability at the supplier’s end will get simultaneously reduced / adjusted on the basis of credit notes issued by the supplier and the corresponding debit notes issued by the buyers.
      3. This would also obviate the need for resorting to provisional assessment presently provided in Central Law and discussed in para (C) above.
      4. The GST Law may contain suitable provision to this effect and the GSTN should have suitable validations to this effect. The validation should include matching of credit and debit notes and reversal of the reduction of the output tax liability in case of the mismatch.
      5. The refund may be on account of CGST, SGST or IGST as the case may be.
      10. TAX REFUND FOR INTERNATIONAL TOURISTS : 

      Tax Refund for International Tourist (TRT) scheme provides an opportunity to the foreign tourists to purchase goods during their stay in any country on payment of GST and obtain refund of the GST so paid, at the time of exit from the country. Nearly 52 countries have adopted such kind of refund mechanism. It was noted that such a scheme helps in attracting tourist and is in line with avowed objective of GST regime of zero rating of goods and Make in India initiative of Government of India. State governments are offering VAT refunds to foreign diplomats and officials of multilateral agencies. This scheme will be implemented through particular retailers who are registered for this scheme. Refund of GST will be available at designated airports and ports only and the refund of the GST paid on retail purchase by the foreign tourists during their stay in India is allowed. A part of the eligible amount of refund will be deducted as handling fee for services rendered. GST law drafting Committee may provide for this provision as well delineate the details of the scheme.

      REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS PROCESSES FOR GST
      Empowered Committee of State Finance Ministers
      New Delhi
      August 2015
      Source:
      http://www.cbec.gov.in/index


      Also Read

      0 comments:

      Post a Comment

      Copyright © 2015 Accounting & Taxation All Right Reserved
      Subscribe by Email Get Free Updates
      Don't Forget To Join US Our Community
      ×
      blogger