9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 967 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of refund of Input Tax Credit - export of services - Zero Rated Supply - period October, 2017 to March, 2018 - HELD THAT - Concededly, the respondent has taken no steps to secure any order with regard to the stay of the Order-in-Appeal pursuant to which the petitioner is now entitled to the claim of refund. We are unable to accept that the Revenue can ignore the Order-in- Appeal and deny the benefits of the same on the ground that it seeks to appeal the said order. In the present case, the petitioner has been denied the benefit of the order in its favour for over two years. Clearly, the same cannot be countenanced. The said issue is also covered by an earlier decisions of this Court in Zones Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Goods Services Tax Delhi East Anr. 2020 (7) TMI 287 - DELHI HIGH COURT and Alex Tour and Travel Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Division-Janakpuri 2023 (5) TMI 505 - DELHI HIGH COURT . The respondent is directed to disburse the petitioner s claim for refund with applicable interest as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within a period of four weeks from today - Petition allowed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax, Zero Rated Supply, rejection of refund application, appeal process, denial of benefits of the order, and the obligation to disburse the refund. Refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax: The petitioner filed a petition seeking directions for the respondent to grant a refund of Rs. 26,88,280/-, related to services exported to M/s. Netgear Asia Pte Ltd. without payment of Integrated Goods and Services Tax during a specific period. The petitioner claimed that the supplies made were Zero Rated Supply, and thus filed a claim for the refund of Input Tax Credit in the prescribed form on a particular date. The respondent initially rejected the refund application, but the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal by an Order-in-Appeal dated 09.03.2021. Denial of Benefits of the Order: Despite the favorable Order-in-Appeal, the petitioner's request for the claim was not processed as the respondent was directed to file an appeal against the said order. The delay was attributed to the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, hindering the Revenue from filing the appeal. The Court noted that the Revenue cannot ignore the Order-in-Appeal and deny the benefits to the petitioner. It was emphasized that the petitioner had been denied the benefit of the order for over two years, which was deemed unacceptable. Obligation to Disburse the Refund: The Court allowed the present petition and directed the respondent to disburse the petitioner's claim for refund with applicable interest expeditiously, within a period of four weeks from the date of the judgment. It was clarified that the respondents could still avail remedies available in law, and if the Revenue succeeds in overturning the Order-in-Appeal, they would be entitled to recover the disbursed amount. The Court referred to earlier decisions to support its ruling on the matter.
|
