Order date – 07 September 2022

Facts – 

• The Petitioner, M/s CTC (India) Private Limited, is a 100 percent export oriented unit, exporting its products to countries like USA, China, Germany and other countries. 
• The petitioner filed an application for refund of accumulated CGST, SGST and IGST credit for the period of January, 2018, total being Rs.9,89,191.00/- in the prescribed Form GST RFD 01A along with supporting documents.
• The petitioner while filing the GSTR 3B return of Input Tax Credit for the month of January, 2018 inadvertently missed out to mention the zero rated supplies to the tune of Rs.3,79,82,605/ against the outward taxable supplies (zero rated) in the said return and instead mentioned the same to be “zero”. However, the said amount of zero rated supplies has been correctly shown in GSTR 1 return of outward supplies against export invoices.
• The respondent served a notice of rejection of application for refund, and the same rejection was upheld by the adjudicating authorities.
• Aggrieved the petitioner filed a petition.

Issue – 

• Whether the petitioner is liable for refund of accumulated CGST, SGST and IGST credit for the period of January, 2018?

Order – 

• The Court observed that the petitioner has not produced any documentary evidence for his claim of refund; either before the adjudicating authority or before the appellate authority though he was afforded personal hearing but the petitioner failed to prove that the declaration zero rated value of GSTR 1 was legal and genuine.
• It also transpired that the Appellate Authority has duly considered Circular No.37/11/2018 GST dated 15.3 .2018 which is related to a refund claim on account of export of goods without payment of tax and held that the same is possible only on verification of invoices
• Also the assessee could not provide any such corroborative evidence in the form of documents even before the Appellate Authority what to say before the assessment proceeding, to substantiate its claim of zero rated supply so that its claim could be validated. 
• The law is very clear that merely claiming any refund on the basis of averments would not suffice unless and until the said claim of any assesse is corroborated by documentary evidence. In the instant case the petitioner is making claim without furnishing any documentary evidence to support their contention.
• Therefore the petition was dismissed.