M/s. Consulate General of Canada, C413-C416, 4th Floor, Elante Office Complex, Plot No. 178-178A, Industrial & Business Park, Phase 1, Chandigarh 160002 (here-in-after referred to as the ‘appellant’) has filed the present appeal against the Order No. 25/AC/R/GST/Div-I/2018, dated 20-3-2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax Division-I, Chandigarh (here-in-after referred to as the ‘adjudicating authority’). I take up the appeal for decision.

2. Briefly stated, that the appellant is a UIN entity registered with the department vide UIN No. 0417CAN00001UNN. The appellant had filed a refund claim of ₹ 18,05,340/- i.e. ₹ 9,02,670/- (CGST) & ₹ 9,02,670/- (SGST/UTGST) under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) read with Section 55 of the Act with the jurisdictional CGST office for the quarter July, 2017 to September, 2017. During scrutiny of the refund claim, it was observed that the appellant had provided input/input service invoices of ₹ 8,40,785/- (CGST) & ₹ 8,40,785/- (SGST/UTGST) only. Accordingly, adjudicating authority vide the impugned order sanctioned the refund of ₹ 8,40,785/- (CGST) & ₹ 8,40,785/- (SGST/UTGST) to the appellant. The adjudicating authority further observed that appellant had not claimed any refund of IGST paid on input/input service. He, therefore, did not consider the invoices submitted by the appellant on which IGST has been paid and rejected the refund in respect of such invoices on the ground that IGST refund was not admissible under CGST or UTGST head.

3. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order on the grounds summarized as under :

3.1 That at the time of filing return under Form GSTR-11 for the quarter July, 2017 to Sept., 2017, the appellant due to technical error, was not able to enter the amount of tax under the head of IGST and therefore the same was entered under the head of CGST and UTGST;

3.2 That adjudicating authority has passed the order without considering the ‘statement of invoices’ submitted by the appellant in terms of the Board’s Circulars No. 36/10/2018-GST, dated 13-3-2018, No. 43/17/2018-GST, dated  13-4-2018 and No. 63/37/2018-GST, dated 14-9-2018.

3.3 That appellant has correctly shown the amount of credit under the head of IGST under ‘Statement of Invoices’.

3.4 That the order passed by the adjudicating authority is arbitrary in nature as refund has been rejected without going into the merits of the case.

3.5 That in view of the above clarification and on the basis of purchase invoices submitted by the appellant, refund of IGST paid on input/input service may be sanctioned to them.

4. Personal Hearing in the case was held on 21-8-2019. Shri Nitin Bhasin, Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant and reiterated the submissions made in their appeal. He again submitted that due to technical reason he cannot enter the amount of IGST of ₹ 1,23,770/- on the portal and this amount automatically entered in CGST/UTGST, for which he showed the screen shot. He further submitted that in statement of invoices, he has claimed it as IGST only. He further relied upon the Board’s Circular 43/17/2018-GST, dated 13-4-2018.

5. I have carefully gone through the facts of case, impugned order, grounds of appeal as well as the submissions put forth by the appellant at the time of personal hearing.

5.1 The appellant is a UIN entity registered with the department vide UIN No. 0417CAN00001UNN. I find that entities having UINs are given a special status under the CGST Act as these are not covered under the definition of registered person. These entities have been granted UINs to enable them to claim refund of GST paid on inward supply of goods or services or both received by them. The procedure for filing returns by UIN entities is specified under sub-rule (1) of Rule 82 of the CGST Rules. The UIN entity is required to file details of inward supplies in FORM GSTR-11. All the entities who have been issued UINs and are notified under Section 55 of the CGST Act will be eligible for refund of inward supply of goods or services in terms of Notification No. 16/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017 as amended. The procedure for filing a refund application has been outlined under Rule 95 of the CGST Rules which provides for filing of refund on quarterly basis in FORM RFD-10 along with a statement of inward invoices in FORM GSTR-11.

5.2 The appellant had filed a refund claim of ₹ 18,05,340/- i.e.  ₹ 9,02,670/- (CGST) & ₹ 9,02,670/- (SGST/UTGST) under Section 54 of the Act read with Section 55 of the Act for the quarter July, 2017 to September, 2017. The adjudicating authority vide the impugned order had sanctioned the refund of CGST & SGST/UTGST to the appellant i.e. ₹ 8,40,785/- (CGST) &  ₹ 8,40,785/-(SGST/UTGST). However, refund of IGST paid on input/input service was rejected on the ground that appellant had not claimed the same in their refund.

5.3 The appellant on the other hand contended that they had claimed refund of ₹ 1,15,167/- of IGST paid on input/input service in the ‘statement of invoices’ submitted by them in terms of the Board’s Circulars No. 36/10/2018-GST, dated 13-3-2018, No. 43/17/2018-GST, dated 13-4-2018 and No. 63/37/2018-GST, dated 14-9-2018. However, due to technical error, they were not able to enter the amount of tax under the head of IGST in Form GSTR-11 and therefore the same was entered under the head of CGST and UTGST. The appellant also submitted copies of invoices on which IGST has been paid in support of their contention that IGST refund of ₹ 1,15,167/- was declared/claimed by them in the ‘statement of invoices’.

5.4 On perusal of invoices, I find that appellant has correctly shown the amount of credit of ₹ 1,15,167/- under the head of IGST in the ‘Statement of Invoices’. It was only due to technical error that the said amount could not be entered under the head of IGST in Form GSTR-11. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of VSG Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CC reported in 2019-TIOL-977-HC-MAD-GST IGST has held that – refund cannot be denied on account of Technical Glitches-Petitioner cannot be made helpless just because the computer system does not enable them to refund the IGST amount. Being an undisputed fact that IGST refund is payable to the petitioner, the petitioner is absolutely entitled to the IGST refund from the department. Similarly in the case of M/s. Continental India Private Limited & Others v. Union of India [2018 (10) G.S.T.L. 423 (All.)], the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court held that – Department cannot deny the transitional credit when the registered taxable person was unable to file the Form GST TRAN-01 due to technical issues. In the instant case also the appellant being a UIN entity, is eligible for refund of IGST, CGST and UTGST paid on inward supply of goods or services in terms of Notification No. 16/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017 as amended. Therefore relying on the cited case laws and in view of the fact that appellant has correctly mentioned ₹ 1,15,167/- under the head of IGST in the ‘Statement of Invoices’, I hold that IGST refund of ₹ 1,15,167/- paid by the appellant on inward supply of goods or services is admissible to them under Section 54 of the Act read with Section 55 of the Act.

ORDER

6. In view of the above, the appeal of the appellant in respect of IGST refund of ₹ 1,15,167/- is allowed. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.