9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 1223 - HC - GSTRefund - Constitutional architecture of CGST Act, 2017, IGST Act 2017, SGST and UGST Acts as well as width, ambit and application of Section 6 of CGST and SGST Acts - Appointment of Central Tax and State Tax officers - availment and utilization of fake ITC - supply of low-grade tobacco products in the garb of smoking mixture for pipes and cigarettes - Overvaluation - HELD THAT -Right from the day the final hearing commenced all the aforesaid matters were taken up for hearing together. This Court did not advice any counsel to argue in a particular manner or not to argue at all. It is only when the petitioner concluded their arguments that this Court called upon learned counsel for respondents to argue. Today to state that learned counsel for respondents should confine their arguments to the issue of law or the petitioner should be allowed to argue first would amount to derailing the hearing. Moreover, question of law cannot be decided in a vacuum. The facts put forward by the respondents would help the Court in determining the question of law correctly - Since, in the interim, investigation by DGGI Ahmedabad has been stayed and in effect no investigation is taking place, this Court, to balance the equities, directs that till further orders, no refunds shall be released to the petitioners. Till further order, no refund to be granted. Application disposed off.
Issues:
1. Constitutional architecture and application of CGST Act, 2017, IGST Act 2017, SGST, and UGST Acts. 2. Allegations of availment and utilization of fake ITC, supply of low-grade tobacco products, and overvaluation by petitioner firm. 3. Investigations by DGGI Ahmedabad Zonal Unit regarding non-existent firms and tax evasion. 4. Allegations of fraudulent refund of Input Tax Credit by domestic tariff area suppliers to SEZ units. 5. Enquiry against M/s Pawanputra Exim and forwarding of investigation to DGGI Ahmedabad. 6. Arguments on facts and law in various writ petitions. Analysis: 1. The learned ASG detailed the constitutional architecture of various tax Acts and the application of Section 6 of CGST and SGST Acts. He highlighted the petitioner firm's alleged involvement in fake ITC utilization, supply of low-grade tobacco products, and overvaluation to pass on fake ITC, necessitating thorough investigation beyond the jurisdiction of the CGST Commissionerate due to inter-connected entities in Delhi NCR region. 2. Investigations by DGGI Ahmedabad Zonal Unit revealed a conspiracy involving non-existent firms engaged in fictitious transactions of "Smoking Mixture for pipes and cigarettes" to avail unlawful ITC. The petitioner firm, M/s Mridul Tobie Inc, was identified as a beneficiary of fake ITC through paper transactions without actual supply of goods. The probe also focused on overvaluation and misclassification of products by the petitioner firm. 3. Mr. Satish Kumar highlighted the fraudulent refund of Input Tax Credit by domestic tariff area suppliers to SEZ units, involving overvalued supply of tobacco products. The investigations targeted entities engaging in such practices to avail ineligible refunds sourced from non-existent entities, leading to a detailed scrutiny of transactions and ITC claims. 4. Mr. Harpreet Singh informed about the enquiry against M/s Pawanputra Exim and the subsequent forwarding of the investigation to DGGI Ahmedabad to prevent duplication of work. The Commissionerate clarified that no ongoing investigation was being conducted against the petitioner, emphasizing the coordination between different tax authorities in handling complex cases. 5. Arguments on facts and law were presented by counsels representing different parties, focusing on specific aspects of the cases. The court emphasized the need for a balanced approach in hearing arguments and directed a future listing for detailed arguments on behalf of the petitioners. 6. Considering the stay on investigations by DGGI Ahmedabad, the court issued directions to withhold refunds to the petitioners until further orders to maintain equity. The order was to be promptly uploaded on the website and shared with counsels via email for compliance and awareness.
|
