9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 921 - HC - GSTRejection of refund application - Refund Application was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax on the ground that the same was not filed within a period of 2 years under Section 54 (1) of the CGST (Central Goods and Service Tax) Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Considering the fair stand taken by the State, the impugned order dated 27th May 2021 is quashed and the Refund Application filed by the Petitioner restored on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax. The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax shall process the Refund Application on merits and in accordance with law, without raising issue of limitation. Petition disposed off.
The Bombay High Court, comprising Justices B. P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, addressed a Writ Petition challenging an order dated 27th May 2021, which rejected the Petitioner's Refund Application for 25 export transactions. The rejection was based on the application being filed beyond the two-year limitation period prescribed under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act, 2017.
The Petitioner's counsel highlighted a notification dated 5th July 2022 from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBITC), which excludes the period from 1st March 2020 to 28th February 2022 from the limitation period calculation. This adjustment brought the Petitioner's refund requests within the permissible period. The Respondent's counsel acknowledged this notification and agreed that the impugned order could be set aside, allowing the matter to be remanded to the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax for re-evaluation. The Court quashed the order of 27th May 2021, reinstated the Refund Application, and directed the Deputy Commissioner to process it on its merits, disregarding the limitation issue. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. The order will be digitally signed and disseminated via fax or email.
|
