Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 114 - HC - GSTIssues Involved: 1. Permitting the petitioner to file a refund claim application for December 2018. 2. Quashing the orders dated 24.05.2020 and 21.07.2020. 3. Directing the respondent authority to consider the refund application ignoring computational mistakes. 4. Allowing the petitioner to file GSTR RED-01A/RFD-01 for December 2018. Summary of Judgment: 1. Permitting the petitioner to file a refund claim application for December 2018: The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari or mandamus to allow filing a refund claim application for December 2018 under the "Any Other" category on the GST portal or alternatively, to permit filing a physical refund application. The court noted that the controversy is covered by the Gujarat High Court's decision in Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, which dealt with similar issues of refund claims for unutilized ITC used in zero-rated supply of goods. 2. Quashing the orders dated 24.05.2020 and 21.07.2020: The petitioner requested the quashing of the orders dated 24.05.2020 and 21.07.2020. The court referred to the Gujarat High Court's decision, which emphasized that technical errors should not prevent the petitioner from claiming the refund. The court highlighted that the petitioner had already filed refund applications under the accumulated ITC category, and due to technical limitations, had to file supplementary applications under the "Any Other" category. 3. Directing the respondent authority to consider the refund application ignoring computational mistakes: The court observed that the petitioner had made an arithmetical error in the initial refund claim, leading to a lower claimed amount. The Gujarat High Court's decision underscored that such errors should not bar the petitioner from receiving the correct refund amount. The court emphasized that the respondent authority should examine the refund claim on its merits and in accordance with the law, without rejecting it due to technical errors. 4. Allowing the petitioner to file GSTR RED-01A/RFD-01 for December 2018: The petitioner sought permission to file GSTR RED-01A/RFD-01 for December 2018. The court, aligning with the Gujarat High Court's decision, allowed the petitioner to manually furnish the refund applications for the left-out amount. The respondent authorities were directed to scrutinize the claim and take appropriate decisions within three months from receiving the certified copy of the order. Conclusion: The petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to manually furnish the refund applications for the left-out amount. The respondent authorities were instructed to scrutinize the claim in accordance with the law and decide on the applications within three months.
|