2025 (4) TMI 734 - HC - GST

Claim of refund of the excess balance in the electronic cash ledger of the firm by the legal heir of the deceased proprietor of M/s Hunny Enterprises - petitioner is not a registered person with the GST Department - rejection of refund claim on the ground that Petitioner did not appear for personal hearing - HELD THAT - The present writ petition marks the second instance wherein the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking refund. It is a matter of concern that almost a year ago the same Petitioner had appeared before a Coordinate Bench of this Court which after considering the matter directed that the refund amount be re-credited within a period of two weeks. It is unfortunate to see that despite the said amount being in the Electronic cash ledger the refund has not been given to the Petitioner till date. List on 5th May 2025.

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The primary issue considered by the Court was whether the Petitioner, as the legal heir of the deceased proprietor of M/s Hunny Enterprises, was entitled to a refund of the excess balance in the electronic cash ledger of the firm, despite her not being a registered person with the GST Department. The Court also examined whether the GST Department's refusal to process the refund due to the Petitioner being unregistered was justified, particularly in light of a prior order directing the re-credit of the refund amount.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

1. Entitlement of Legal Heir to Refund

- Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Court considered the provisions of the GST laws regarding the refund of amounts in the electronic cash ledger and the rights of legal heirs to claim such refunds. The legal framework generally allows for the refund of excess amounts in the ledger, subject to procedural compliance.

- Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court noted that the Petitioner, as the legal heir of the deceased proprietor, had a legitimate claim to the refund. The death of the proprietor and the subsequent cancellation of the GST registration were not in dispute, and the Petitioner had previously been recognized as entitled to the refund by a prior order of the Court.

- Key Evidence and Findings: The death certificate of the proprietor and the order canceling the GST registration were critical pieces of evidence supporting the Petitioner's claim. The Court found that these documents sufficiently established the Petitioner's entitlement to the refund.

- Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the relevant GST provisions to conclude that the Petitioner, as the legal heir, was entitled to the refund. The prior order directing the re-credit of the refund amount further reinforced this conclusion.

- Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Respondent-GST Department argued that the Petitioner was not entitled to the refund due to her unregistered status. However, the Court dismissed this argument, emphasizing that the Petitioner's status as a legal heir and the prior Court order were sufficient to establish her entitlement.

- Conclusions: The Court concluded that the Petitioner was entitled to the refund and that the GST Department's refusal to process the refund was unjustified.

2. Compliance with Prior Court Order

- Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Court considered the principles of compliance with judicial orders and the obligations of parties to adhere to such directives.

- Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court expressed concern over the GST Department's failure to comply with the prior order directing the re-credit of the refund amount. The Court emphasized the binding nature of judicial orders and the necessity for prompt compliance.

- Key Evidence and Findings: The prior order of the Court directing the refund re-credit was a critical piece of evidence. The Court found that the GST Department's failure to comply with this order was unjustified and indicative of administrative oversight.

- Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the principles of judicial compliance to determine that the GST Department was obligated to re-credit the refund amount as previously ordered.

- Treatment of Competing Arguments: The GST Department's argument that the refund could not be processed due to the Petitioner's unregistered status was rejected. The Court reiterated the binding nature of its prior order and the necessity for compliance.

- Conclusions: The Court concluded that the GST Department's failure to comply with the prior order was unjustified and directed immediate compliance.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

- The Court reaffirmed the principle that legal heirs are entitled to claim refunds from the electronic cash ledger of a deceased registered person, provided that the necessary procedural requirements are met.

- The Court emphasized the binding nature of judicial orders and the necessity for parties to comply promptly with such directives. The failure of the GST Department to comply with the prior order was deemed unjustified.

- The Court directed the GST Department to re-credit the refund amount into the Petitioner's electronic cash ledger within a specified timeframe, reiterating the Petitioner's entitlement to the refund as the legal heir of the deceased proprietor.

← Previous Next →