SC Dismissed SLP Against HC’s Order Granting Interest on Refund of Excess Recovery of Tax to VIVO

Case Details: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Vivo Mobile India (P.) Ltd. - [2024] 158 taxmann.com 276 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Mrs B.V. Nagarathna & Augustine George Masih, JJ.
  • N. Venkatraman, Sr. Adv. Andleeb Naqvi, Chandrashekhar, Ankit Khatri, Advs. & Bhakti Vardhan Singh, AOR for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the Revenue filed Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the order of the Honourable High Court wherein it was held that in terms of first proviso to Rule 36(4) of CGST Rules, 2017, the assessee was entitled to file monthly return in Form GSTR-3B in September, 2020, by claiming cumulative adjustment of differential ITC for disputed period February, 2020 to August, 2020 and directed to refund the amount recovered. However, the department contended that there was no excess recovery made by the department.

Supreme Court Held

The Apex Court noted that the scheme for cumulative adjustment was available for the period February, 2020 to August, 2020. Therefore, the demand of differential ITC by Revenue computed on month to month adjustment, was correctly set aside by the High Court with directions to refund excess collected amount with interest at 6% p.a. from date of payment by assessee till date of refund by Revenue.

Therefore, the Revenue should verify if there was excess collection, and if the amount collected would be found in excess, the High Court’s directions shall prevail and SLP was accordingly dismissed.

List of Cases Reviewed

• • Vivo Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh [2023] 155 taxmann.com 324/100 GST 577 (All.) SLP dismissed.