GST

Advisory to UIN Entities ( Consulates, Embassies and other UN Organizations) claiming GST Refunds

Advisory to UIN Entities claiming GST Refunds. Wrong reporting of invoice data in FORM GSTR-11 or statement of invoice may lead to delay 

The GST Act provides for allotting a Unique Identification Number (UIN) to Consulates, Embassies and other UN Organizations to enable such entities to claim refund of GST paid. One of the conditions for claiming this refund is to file Invoice Level Data in their FORM GSTR-11 on the common portal. There are common discrepancies which have been noticed by GST Authorities while processing refund applications.

FORM GSTR-11 under Rule 82 of the CGST Rules, 2017 mandates reporting “Place of Supply” for every invoice on which refund is applied for. Many UIN entities while filling invoice data have been reporting their place of supply as the State where they are registered instead of the place of supply as reflected in the invoice.

For example, it was observed that Embassies registered in Delhi have been consistently declaring their place of supply as “New Delhi” even on hotel service consumed in the State of Maharashtra for which the place of supply is Maharashtra.

It may be noted that under the GST law, place of supply determines the chargeability of CGST / SGST or IGST tax on an invoice. Generally, except few exceptions, if the location of the supplier and the place of supply are in the same State then CGST + SGST is charged on an invoice and if the location of the supplier and the place of supply are in separate States then IGST is charged.

Therefore, it is advised that while reporting the “place of supply” and charging of CGST / SGST or IGST on an invoice, the details shall be exactly as per the details mentioned in the invoice issued by the supplier of goods or services. Wrong reporting of invoice level data in FORM GSTR-11 or in the statement of invoice submitted may lead to delay in processing / rejection of refund claims

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non- payment of cost imposed can’t trigger automatic confirmation of an invalid exparte assessment.

ITAT power to pass such orders "as it thinks fit" implies a judicial discretion to be exercised within the parameters…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

4 days ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

7 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

1 week ago