2020 (3) TMI 12 - HC - GST

Refund of Input tax credit - Section 142(3) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The material on record discloses that the appellant had also moved an application dated 28.06.2018 for refund of the Input Tax Credit claimed under the TNVAT Act and this application was without prejudice to their rights under Section 140(3) of the TNGST Act. The appellant had also challenged the various provisions of the CGST and TNGST Acts in this regard in W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 18724 of 2018, with regard to the time limit of 90 days in processing the applications for the credit of the Input Tax Credit. Pending the two writ petitions, the learned Single Judge, dismissed the instant writ petitions as being per-mature, by observing that it was open to the appellant to make appropriate modifications in the prayer in the pending writ petitions ie.,W.P.(MD)Nos. 18723 18724 of 2018, challenging the Rules of the CGST and TNGST to take care of the relief as prayed for in the writ petitions. Today, the learned Counsel for the appellant has withdrawn the writ petitions being W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 18724 of 2018. In view of the fact that the writ petitions have been withdrawn, we direct the respondents to consider the application dated 28.06.2018, submitted by the appellant for refund of the Input Tax Credit under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, independently and on its own merits. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order for refund of Input Tax Credit under TNVAT Act and TNGST Act, withdrawal of writ petitions challenging CGST and TNGST Acts, direction for consideration of refund application independently.

Issue 1: Challenge to order for refund of Input Tax Credit under TNVAT Act and TNGST Act

The appellant challenged an order dated 12.11.2018 seeking a Writ of Mandamus for the Assistant Commissioner to grant refund on accrued Input Tax Credit under TNVAT Act amounting to ?30,44,254 under TNGST Act. The appellant had previously applied for refund under TNVAT Act and challenged provisions of CGST and TNGST Acts regarding processing time for credit applications. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions as premature, suggesting modifications in pending petitions for desired relief. The appellant withdrew the writ petitions (W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 & 18724 of 2018), leading to a direction for independent consideration of the refund application by respondents within 12 weeks from the order's receipt.

Issue 2: Withdrawal of writ petitions challenging CGST and TNGST Acts

The learned Counsel for the appellant withdrew the writ petitions (W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 & 18724 of 2018) challenging CGST and TNGST Acts. Consequently, the respondents were directed to evaluate the refund application submitted by the appellant under TNVAT Act separately and solely on its merits within 12 weeks from the date of the order.

Issue 3: Direction for consideration of refund application independently

As a result of the withdrawal of the writ petitions challenging CGST and TNGST Acts, the judgment dated 12.11.2018 was set aside. The withdrawal of the writ petitions did not affect the appellant's right to claim refund of Input Tax Credit. The Writ Appeal was allowed, with no order as to costs, emphasizing the need for respondents to consider the refund application under TNVAT Act independently and promptly based on its merits.

This judgment clarifies the process for seeking a refund of Input Tax Credit under the TNVAT Act and TNGST Act, highlighting the importance of independent consideration of refund applications by tax authorities. The withdrawal of writ petitions challenging certain provisions of the CGST and TNGST Acts did not impact the appellant's right to claim the refund. The direction for a time-bound assessment of the refund application underscores the need for efficient and fair resolution of tax-related disputes.