2017 (9) TMI 591 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Reversal of ITC - Form-W was filed belatedly - Held that - The issue, as to whether belated filing of the Form-W, would be a bar for considering the request of the petitioner has already been considered and decided by this court by holding such delay, cannot stand in the way of considering the request for refund - the respondent shall have to consider the request of the petitioner for refund without reference to the belated filing of Form W - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to belated filing of Form-W.
2. Rejection of refund request based on belated filing of Form-W.
3. Legal implications of delay in filing Form-W for considering refund requests.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the proceedings directing the reversal of ITC amounting to ?19,88,450 due to the belated filing of Form-W. The court noted that a previous order had established that delay in filing Form-W should not bar the consideration of refund requests for zero-rated sales. The court cited precedents where delay in filing did not justify rejection of refund claims, emphasizing the importance of Input Tax Credit provisions and timely filing of monthly returns for refund claims related to zero-rated sales.

2. The court reiterated that the delay in submitting Form-W or using manual submission should not be grounds for refusing to review the petitioner's refund application. The respondent acknowledged that the issue was previously addressed in a similar case, indicating that the petitioner's claim would be reconsidered based on the earlier order favoring refund requests despite delays in Form-W submission.

3. Considering the established legal principles and precedents, the court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order that rejected the refund request due to belated Form-W filing. The court directed the respondent to reassess the petitioner's refund claim without considering the delay in Form-W submission and instructed the respondent to issue appropriate orders within eight weeks. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to legal provisions for refund claims related to zero-rated sales and Input Tax Credit, ensuring timely consideration of applications irrespective of minor procedural delays.