2020 (5) TMI 443 - HC - GST

Refund of GST - It is stated that on the application of the applicant/petitioner for refund, the Assistant Commissioner, GST, Delhi (East) has passed an order dated 19th September, 2019 rejecting the application of the applicant/petitioner for refund - applicant/petitioner states that he is not aware of the said order, of which copy also has not been furnished to him - HELD THAT - The order dated 19th September, 2019 would not be an impediment to the relief being granted in the writ petition and the hearing of the writ petition is not to await the outcome of the appeal against the order dated 19th September, 2019. It is contended that in the circumstances of this case no appeal against the order 19th September, 2019 is required to be filed - The counsel for the respondent GST is permitted to email the counter affidavit along with annexures to this Court. List the writ petition for hearing on 10th June, 2020.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in granting entitled refund of ?2,38,00,000 to the petitioner.
2. Non-receipt of the order rejecting refund application dated 19th September, 2019 by the petitioner's counsel.
3. Dispute over the necessity of filing a statutory appeal against the order dated 19th September, 2019.
4. Request for early hearing of the writ petition for refund.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Delay in granting entitled refund
The petitioner sought early hearing for the refund of ?2,38,00,000, which had not been granted despite repeated orders. The counsel for Goods and Services Tax (GST) mentioned a rejection order dated 19th September, 2019, against which a statutory appeal was available. However, the petitioner's counsel claimed unawareness of this order and argued that the appeal need not delay the relief sought in the writ petition.

Issue 2: Non-receipt of rejection order
The petitioner's counsel stated that he was not informed of the rejection order dated 19th September, 2019, and no copy was provided to him. Despite this, the counsel contended that the order should not obstruct the relief requested in the writ petition.

Issue 3: Necessity of statutory appeal
There was a disagreement between the parties regarding the requirement of filing a statutory appeal against the rejection order dated 19th September, 2019. The petitioner's counsel argued that the appeal was unnecessary for the relief sought in the writ petition, emphasizing that the hearing should not be delayed due to the appeal process.

Issue 4: Early hearing of the writ petition
The petitioner requested an early hearing of the writ petition for the refund, highlighting the delay in receiving the entitled amount. The Court permitted the respondent GST to email the counter affidavit and annexures, tagging them to the writ petition. The petitioner was granted the right to file a rejoinder to the counter affidavit within two weeks, with the writ petition scheduled for a hearing on 10th June, 2020.

This judgment addresses the delay in granting the entitled refund to the petitioner, the non-receipt of the rejection order by the petitioner's counsel, the dispute over the necessity of filing a statutory appeal, and the request for an early hearing of the writ petition for refund. The Court allowed the petitioner's request for an early hearing, emphasizing the importance of resolving the refund issue promptly despite the pending appeal process.