2021 (4) TMI 1212 - HC - GST

Refund of IGST - Export of goods - zero rated supplies - grievance of the petitioner is that exports were made in September 2017, but till date, IGST is not refunded to the petitioner - HELD THAT - The issue involved decided in case of M/S. PRECOT MERIDIAN LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2020 (1) TMI 90 - MADRAS HIGH COURT where it was held that respondents are directed to refund the amount of IGST paid by the petitioner for the goods exported from India which are zero rated supplies, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The first respondent herein is directed to sanction the refund of IGST of ₹ 2,35,008/- paid by the petitioner in respect of the goods exported i.e 'Zero Rated Supplies' made vide shipping bills mentioned herein above along with entitled interest @ 9% to the petitioner till the date of actual refund, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund of IGST paid by the petitioner for exported goods.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a merchant exporter, filed a Writ Petition seeking a directive for the refund of IGST amounting to ?2,35,008 paid on goods exported. The petitioner highlighted the provisions of Rule 96 of the CGST Rules, 2017, stating that the shipping bill submitted by an exporter is considered an application for IGST refund on exported goods. The petitioner emphasized that despite fulfilling all requirements and exporting goods in September 2017, the IGST refund had not been processed by the respondent authorities, leading to the filing of the Writ Petition.

The petitioner's counsel referenced a previous judgment to support their case, emphasizing that the issue at hand has been addressed by various courts, including the Madras High Court. The judgment cited highlighted the entitlement of exporters to IGST refund upon fulfilling specified conditions, irrespective of any circulars that may suggest otherwise. The judgment stressed the binding nature of court decisions over circulars, emphasizing that circulars contrary to statutory provisions hold no legal weight. Additionally, a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court had previously directed the refund of IGST in a similar case, further strengthening the petitioner's argument.

Consequently, the court found the previous judgment directly applicable to the current case and allowed the Writ Petition. The respondent was directed to refund the IGST amount of ?2,35,008 along with 9% interest to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receiving the court order. The court's decision was based on the legal entitlement of the petitioner to the IGST refund for the zero-rated supplies exported, in line with the relevant statutory provisions and previous judicial interpretations.