Case Title |
Bmg Informatics Private Limited VS Union Of India |
Court |
Gauhati High Court |
Honorable Judges |
Justice Achintya Malla Bujor Barua |
Citation |
2021 (09) GSTPanacea 105 HC Gauhati WP (C) /3878/ 2021 |
Judgement Date |
02-September-2021 |
The court heard arguments from Dr. A Saraf, a respected senior counsel representing the petitioners in WP(C)No.3878/2021 & WP(C)No.3880/2021. They also heard from Mr. SC Keyal, counsel for the petitioners in WP(C)No.3675/2021 and WP(C)4120/2021.
It was noted that the petitioners in WP(C)No.3675/2021 and WP(C)No.4120/2021, who are the authorities under the GST Department, are the respondents in WP(C)No.3878/2021 and WP(C)No.3880/2021. On the other hand, BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd., the assessee, is the respondent in WP(C)No.3675/2021 and WP(C)No.4120/2021. This means that the learned counsel representing the petitioners in the first set of writ petitions also represents the respondents in the corresponding writ petitions filed by the other party.
In essence, the court has considered arguments from both sides in multiple cases where the GST Department authorities are respondents in some petitions and BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. is the respondent in others. The counsel representing the parties in one set of petitions is also representing the opposing parties in the corresponding petitions.
Certainly! Here’s a long summary based on the information provided:
In the matter of WP(C) No. 3878/2021 & WP(C) No. 3880/2021, Dr. A Saraf, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner (referred to as “the assessee”), and Mr. SC Keyal, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 3675/2021 and WP(C) 4120/2021 (referred to as “the department”), were heard.
The case involves BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd., the assessee, which is an IT system integrator and service provider primarily selling information and technology products to various entities in the North Eastern region, including Government Departments, PSUs, and Research/Educational Institutes. The assessee is a registered dealer under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 (CGST Act of 2017) with GSTIN 18AADCB2203Q3ZL.
BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. submitted a claim for refund under FORM-GST-RFD-02, acknowledged with Acknowledgement Number ZQ1802200360224 on 28.02.2020. In response, the GST Department issued a show-cause notice on 10.04.2020, alleging misdeclaration of the total turnover in Annexure-1 to the RFD-01 for the period of October – December 2018. Consequently, the department stated that the refund claimed was liable to be rejected.
The assessee replied to this notice on 25.04.2020, providing reasons why they believed there was no misdeclaration. Subsequently, the Assistant Commissioner CGST, Central Excise, and Customs, Guwahati (referred to as “the Assistant Commissioner”), considered the claim for refund and passed an order dated 22.05.2020, where the claim for refund for an amount…
(Note: The summary was cut off here. If you need the continuation, let me know.
The case in question involves two sets of parties: BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. (referred to as the “assessee”), a company dealing with IT system integration and service provision primarily to government departments and educational institutions, and the authorities under the GST Department (referred to as the “department”). There are two sets of petitions: WP(C) No.3878/2021 & WP(C) No.3880/2021 filed by the assessee and WP(C) No.3675/2021 & WP(C) No.4120/2021 filed by the department.
1. The petitions were heard by Dr. A Saraf, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.3878/2021 & WP(C) No.3880/2021, and Mr. SC Keyal, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.3675/2021 and WP(C) 4120/2021.
2. It is noted that the petitioners in WP(C) No.3675/2021 and WP(C) No.4120/2021 (the department) are the respondents in WP(C) No.3878/2021 and WP(C) No.3880/2021 (filed by the assessee), and vice versa. For convenience, the petitioner in WP(C) No.3878/2021 and WP(C) No.3880/2021 is referred to as the “assessee,” and the petitioners in WP(C) No.3675/2021 and WP(C) No.4120/2021 are referred to as the “department.”
3. BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. is registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 (CGST Act of 2017) as a dealer with GSTIN 18AADCB2203Q3ZL.
4. The assessee submitted a refund claim under FORM-GST-RFD-02, which was acknowledged on 28.02.2020. The department issued a show-cause notice on 10.04.2020, alleging misdeclaration of total turnover for the period October – December 2018, thus challenging the refund claim.
5. In response, the assessee provided a reply on 25.04.2020 explaining why there was no misdeclaration. The Assistant Commissioner, in considering the refund claim, issued an order dated 22.05.2020 rejecting the claim for Rs. 3,92,594/- for the period from 01.10.2018 to 31.12.2018. The rejection was based on Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act of 2017, citing that the accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) could not be refunded as the input and output supplies were the same, despite attracting different tax rates based on the class of buyer. This decision was supported by Circular No. 135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020, paragraph 3.2.
6. The Assistant Commissioner’s order concluded that Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017 did not apply to the assessee’s case, as the input and output supplies were considered the same, even with differing tax rates based on the buyer’s class.
7. Additionally, in paragraph 5 of the order, it was noted that BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. is primarily engaged in sales and service of information and technology products to Government Departments, PSUs, and other Research and Educational Institutes in the North Eastern region.
In essence, the case involves the rejection of the assessee’s refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner, citing that the input and output supplies were considered the same despite differing tax rates, and therefore, not eligible for refund under Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017. This decision was supported by a circular from the GST department. The parties involved are BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd. (the assessee) and the authorities under the GST Department (the department.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law;