9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1025 - HC - GSTRefund along with interest - It is the petitioner s case that the refund due to it has not been processed by the respondents as its GSTN registration has been incorrectly reflected as suspended - HELD THAT - It is submitted on behalf of the respondents that the form GSTR-2A is not in the correct format. Concededly, the counter affidavit does not indicate any specific deficiency in the form as uploaded by the petitioner. Admittedly, form GSTR 2A is a system generated form. It is stated that certain columns in the form GSTR 2A are blank and therefore, the application for refund has not been processed. According to the petitioner, the form GSTR 2A, as visible at its end, reflects all relevant particulars. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the scanned copy of the said form (GSTR-2A.pdf) was uploaded along with the application. The respondents are directed to examine whether the form GSTR 2A, as visible at the petitioner s end, reflects all relevant details. If it does, it would be apparent that there is a technical error is in the respondents system. List for compliance on 15.02.2023.
Issues:
- Petitioner seeking refund and rectification of GSTN status Analysis: The petitioner filed a petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to refund a specific amount along with interest and rectify the petitioner's suspended status in the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN). The petitioner claimed that its refund had not been processed due to the incorrect reflection of its GSTN registration as suspended by the respondents. The petitioner had applied for a refund three times, with rejections citing reasons such as the GSTN being suspended and incomplete supporting documents. However, the petitioner contended that all necessary documents, including form GSTR 2A, were duly submitted. The respondents argued that although the form GSTR 2A was uploaded in PDF format, it was not in the correct form, leading to processing issues. The petitioner had approached the authorities, who confirmed the discrepancy between the visible active registration and the backend suspended status, hindering the refund process. The court noted discrepancies in the respondents' arguments, as the counter affidavit did not specify any deficiencies in the uploaded form GSTR 2A. The form GSTR 2A is system-generated, and while the respondents claimed certain columns were blank, the petitioner asserted that all relevant details were present in the uploaded scanned copy. The court directed the respondents to verify if the form GSTR 2A displayed by the petitioner contained all necessary information, indicating a potential technical error in the respondents' system. If a problem was identified, the respondents were instructed to resolve it within a week and process the refund application within two weeks based on the forms already submitted. In case of any inability to process the refund, the respondents were required to inform the petitioner accordingly. The matter was listed for compliance on a specified date, with the court's order to be served through the Court Master's signature.
|
