2021 (12) TMI 831 - HC - GST

Duty drawback - refund of unutilized input tax credit - despite the verification exercise carried out in terms of Annexure 1, Circular No. 131/1/2020 GST dated 23.01.2020, the tag of risky exporter is not being removed - HELD THAT - Matter be listed in the week of 17 th January, 2022.

Summary

Issues:
1. Verification exercise not resulting in removal of risky exporter tag and denial of duty drawback and input tax credit refund.
2. Failure to register grievance at the prescribed portal as per Circular No. 131/1/2020 GST.
3. Request for adjournment to approach competent authority and seek instructions.
4. Instruction sought regarding consequential action taken pursuant to Annexure 9 and Annexure 11.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, through counsel Mr. Vinay Shroff, highlighted the issue of the verification exercise not leading to the removal of the risky exporter tag and the denial of duty drawback and input tax credit refund. Reference was made to specific documents, including Annexure 4 and Circular No. 131/1/2020 GST. The petitioner's claim was that despite the verification, the benefits were not being granted, leading to a dispute.

2. Counsel for respondent No. 3 pointed out that the petitioner had not registered the grievance at the prescribed portal as required by Circular No. 131/1/2020 GST. This failure to follow the prescribed procedure was presented as a defense against the petitioner's claims, indicating a procedural lapse on the petitioner's part.

3. In response to the situation, the petitioner's counsel requested an adjournment of four weeks to enable the petitioner to approach the competent authority as per the circular. This request was granted, allowing the petitioner the opportunity to rectify the procedural deficiency and potentially address the issues raised regarding the denial of benefits.

4. Additionally, instructions were sought by the counsel for the CGST regarding the consequential action taken following Annexure 9 and Annexure 11. This indicates a need to clarify the steps taken or to be taken by the authorities in response to the petitioner's claims and the verification exercise conducted, suggesting a further review or decision-making process to be undertaken.

Overall, the judgment reflects a legal dispute involving procedural compliance, verification outcomes, and the denial of benefits to the petitioner. The court allowed for a procedural remedy by granting an adjournment for the petitioner to address the deficiency in registering the grievance while seeking further instructions on the consequential actions to be taken.