2021 (10) TMI 371 - HC - GST

Challenge Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules - Levy of inegrated tax on goods exported - claim of refund of such tax paid on the goods exported under Section 16(3)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Issue Notice making it returnable on 20.10.2021. Noticing the fact that many such matters are pending from the year 2019 and there is an urgency made out by learned advocate Mr. Paritosh Gupta, let all those matters be posted for hearing on 20.10.2021.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, entitlement to pay Integrated Tax on exported goods and claim refund, quashing of proceedings initiated against the petitioner, interim relief sought, urgency in pending matters.

Analysis:
The petitioner has approached the Court seeking to challenge Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, and has requested the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ to strike down the said rule as ultra vires various provisions of the IGST Act, CGST Act, and the Constitution of India. Additionally, the petitioner seeks a declaration to pay Integrated Tax on goods exported and claim a refund of such tax paid under specific sections of the IGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also requests the Court to quash proceedings initiated against them and seeks interim relief to restrain coercive recovery actions until the next hearing date.

The Court has heard the petitioner's advocate, Mr. Paritosh Gupta, who has highlighted the similarity of the issue with other cases previously addressed by the Court. Notice has been issued, making the matter returnable on a specified date. The petitioner has also requested interim relief, stating that no recovery should be made on the tax paid for goods exported and refunded until a certain date. The Court has acknowledged the urgency in addressing pending matters from 2019 and has scheduled a hearing for multiple related cases on the same date.

Both parties have been directed to exchange written submissions and authorities to be relied upon. The petitioner has been granted the liberty to approach the Court before the scheduled date. Direct service and service by speed post have been permitted for effective communication in the case. The Court has ensured that all necessary steps are taken to facilitate a fair and efficient resolution of the matter.

This judgment reflects a comprehensive analysis of the issues raised by the petitioner, considering the legal framework and previous precedents. The Court's directions aim to address the petitioner's concerns while ensuring a fair and timely resolution of the case, taking into account the urgency and complexity of the matter at hand.