9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 1185 - HC - GSTSeeking refund of 90% of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) and Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) amount paid by the petitioner against the Export of goods - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the first respondent has sanctioned refund both by virtue of the provisional refund orders and the final orders sanctioning the refund. The second respondent has not only failed to respond to the request of the petitioner, but even before this Court, they have not been able to give any reason as to why the refund is not made despite orders of the first respondent. These amounts are rightfully due to the petitioner. The second respondent is directed to refund the amount due to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not otherwise paid - Petition allowed.
Issues:
1. Delay in disbursement of sanctioned refund amount of CGST and IGST u/s Export of goods for the year 2017-2018. 2. Failure to refund 90% of CGST and IGST amount despite provisional and final sanction orders. Issue 1: The petitioner, engaged in exporting natural rubber-based prevulcanised latex, sought a Writ of Mandamus for the disbursement of the sanctioned refund amount of 90% of CGST and IGST paid against the Export of goods for the year 2017-2018. The first respondent had provisionally sanctioned the refund orders for various months in 2018 and 2019 as per Rule 91(2) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. However, the petitioner had only received a portion of the refund amount, with 90% of the CGST and IGST remaining unpaid. Despite submitting bank authorization details, the refund had not been processed, leading to the filing of the writ petition. Issue 2: Upon hearing both parties, it was evident that the first respondent had sanctioned the refund as per provisional and final orders. However, the second respondent had failed to provide any valid reason for the delay in refunding the remaining 90% of the CGST and IGST amount to the petitioner. The Court found that the amounts were rightfully due to the petitioner and directed the second respondent to refund the outstanding amount within four weeks from the date of the order, if not already paid, without imposing any costs.
|
