9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (10) TMI 780 - HC - GSTRejection of refund of Goods and Services Tax (GST) filed u/s 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - It is stated by the petitioner that the impugned refund rejection order was decided without considering the submissions of the petitioner and without granting it any opportunity of personal hearing - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The present petition is amongst a batch of petitions that were heard together being W.P.(C) No.1298/2023, W.P.(C) No.1299/2023 and W.P.(C) No.1300/2023 and W.P.(C) No.1298/2023 was heard as the lead matter. The questions raised in the present petition are covered by the decision rendered today in 2024 (5) TMI 177 - DELHI HIGH COURT . Matter remanded to the appropriate authority for consideration afresh - petition disposed off by way of remand.
Issues:
Impugning refund rejection orders under Section 54 of CGST Act, validity of Circular NNo.151/07/2021-GST, rejection of refund application without considering submissions or granting personal hearing. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the Refund Rejection Orders dated 01.07.2022 and 26.10.2022, which denied the refund of Goods and Services Tax (GST) filed under Section 54 of the CGST Act. The petitioner sought directions for refund of GST paid in the Financial Year 2018-19 and claimed interest on the refund amount. Additionally, the petitioner contested the validity of Circular NNo.151/07/2021-GST, stating it was ultra vires the provisions of relevant notifications under the CGST Act and DGST Act. The petitioner filed a refund application under Section 54 of the CGST Act, seeking a refund of Rs. 23,35,03,888/- for the Financial Year 2018-19 related to services provided, including conducting examinations like NEET and examination services for DNB and FNB courses. The acknowledgment of the refund application was issued, but a Show Cause Notice was also served proposing cancellation of registration due to discrepancies in the refund claim. Despite the petitioner's reply to the Show Cause Notice explaining the basis for the refund claim, the refund was rejected in the impugned order dated 01.07.2022. The rejection cited the absence of supporting documents like assessment orders or appeals. The petitioner contended that the rejection was decided without considering its submissions or granting a personal hearing, leading to unfair treatment. The judgment disposed of the petition by setting aside the impugned orders and remanding the matter for reconsideration by the appropriate authority. This decision aligned with a previous judgment in a related matter, emphasizing the need for a fair review process and consideration of submissions before rejecting refund applications.
|
