9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jected and on the other hand such partially rejected amount is not even being re-credited into the electronic credit ledger of the writ-applicant even though there is an order passed by the authority for re-credit of the rejected amount. It also appears from the documents on record that the order partially rejecting the refund was passed without issuing any show cause notice to the writ-applicant and is also a nonspeaking and cryptic order. The matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for deciding afresh the refund application of the writ-applicant to the extent the refund has been rejected. The refund which has already been granted to the writ-applicant may not be disturbed - Application allowed by way of remand. - R/SPECIA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Hon ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith grant refund or re-credit of the amount of tax of ₹ 10,41,355; E. Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer D may kindly be granted; F. Such further relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your petitioner shall forever pray. 2. The facts giving rise to the present writ-application may be summarised as under : 2(1) The writ-applicant is a private limited company engaged in the business of providing information technology consulting and support services. The writ-applicant is registered under the Central/Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt was granted, yet while processing the final refund, the refund of an amount of ₹ 10,41,355=00 was rejected by the impugned order dated 17.2.2021 stating Inadmissible (Entry Not Showing in Annexure B) . 2(9) When the writ-applicant approached the authority regarding the rejection, the writ-applicant was told that while the refund cannot be granted, the writ-applicant would be entitled to the re-credit in the electronic credit ledger of the amount of refund rejected. The writ-applicant was, however, told to give declaration that it would not file appeal against the order rejecting refund. 2(10) The writ-applicant, therefore, gave a declaration that it would not file appeal against the refund rejection order and request was mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f taxes are concerned, the authority has to only verify whether the goods or services have been exported or not, and whether the tax in respect of which refund is being claimed has been actually paid or not. Such error in processing of the refund has also led to a situation whereby the authority is unable to re-credit the rejected amount in the electronic credit ledger even though an order of re-credit has been passed. (b) The writ-applicant was not issued any show cause notice nor any opportunity of hearing was given before rejection of the refund, leading to an erroneous order being passed. If the impugned order qua the rejection of the refund is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the adjudicating authority for fresh processing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se notice to the writ-applicant and is also a nonspeaking and cryptic order. 8. It will, therefore, be in the interest of justice that the impugned order dated 17.2.2021 (annexed at Annexure A), to the extent the refund application of the writ-applicant has been rejected, is quashed and set-aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for deciding afresh the refund application of the writ-applicant to the extent the refund has been rejected. The refund which has already been granted to the writ-applicant may not be disturbed. 9. Since Mr.Sharma, the learned AGP has indicated that some procedural issues may again crop up while partly adjudicating the refund application, so as of abundant caution we clarify that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
