2025 (3) TMI 608 - HC - GST

Refund of the IGST account paid by invoking Section 16(3) of IGST Act read with Section 54 of the CGST Act read with Rule 96 of CGST Rules - Zero Rated Supply - HELD THAT - The issue raised in the writ petition is no longer res integra . The Hon ble Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in M/s.Amit Cotton Industries Through Partner Veljibhai Virjibhai Ranipa Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs 2019 (7) TMI 472 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT had categorically held that the aforesaid circular cannot prevail over Rule 96. The Hon ble Division Bench observed that the circular will not save the situation for the Department. The first respondent is directed to refund a sum of Rs. 12, 72, 827/- together with applicable interest to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition allowed.

Summary

The Madras High Court, presided over by Honourable Mr. Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Honourable Mr. Justice M. Jothiraman, addressed a writ petition filed by an exporter of pharmaceuticals and surgical goods seeking a refund of Rs. 12,72,827/- paid towards IGST. The petitioner invoked Section 16(3) of the IGST Act, Section 54 of the CGST Act, and Rule 96 of the CGST Rules, claiming entitlement to a refund under the "Zero Rated Supply" provision.The Court referenced a precedent from the Gujarat High Court (2019 (7) TMI 472), which held that a circular cannot override Rule 96, thus supporting the petitioner's claim. Consequently, the Court directed the first respondent to refund the amount with applicable interest within eight weeks. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.