9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 592 - HC - GSTRefund of GST - Rejection on the ground of time limitation - Circular bearing No. 162/18/2021-GST dated 25.9.2021 - HELD THAT - Circular bearing No. 162/18/2021-GST dated 25.9.2021 was issued by the CBIC on the subject/clarification in respect to refund of tax specified in Section 77(i) of the CGST Act and Section 19(i) of the IGST Act. Earlier, vide Notification No. 35/2001-Central Tax dated 24.9.2021, Sub-Rule (1A) of Rule 89 of CGST Rules 2017 has been inserted - the relevant CBIEC had extended a benevolent provision for extension of limitation of refund in case of wrong deposit. Petition allowed.
Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are: 1. Rejection of refund application u/s 54 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Rejection of refund claim for excess tax paid for a specific period. Issue 1: Rejection of refund application u/s 54 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief for the rejection of their refund application under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that their case involved payment of tax under the wrong head, which falls under Section 77 of the Act and does not prescribe any limitation period for filing refund claims. Despite the acknowledgment of the incorrect payment, the refund application was rejected on the grounds of limitation. The court noted the rejection based on limitation and referred to Circular No. 162/18/2021-GST, which provided clarification on refund of tax under Section 77 of the CGST Act. Additionally, Rule 89 of CGST Rules 2017 was amended to allow for an extended period for filing refund applications in cases of wrong deposits. Consequently, the court quashed the order rejecting the refund application. Issue 2: Rejection of refund claim for excess tax paid for a specific period The petitioner also challenged the rejection of their claim for refund of excess tax paid for the period August 2017 to March 2018. The court directed the respondents to show cause for rejecting the refund claim for this specific period. Upon satisfaction of the petitioner's entitlement to the refund, the court ordered the quashing and setting aside of the orders rejecting the refund for the mentioned period. The judgment granted the petitioner the liberty to file an application for refund of excess CGST paid within thirty days, to be considered in light of the latest circular within another thirty days. The petition was allowed with the mentioned observations and directions, with no costs imposed.
|
