2023 (3) TMI 877

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aring for the petitioner, states that although the requisite information has already been provided, the petitioner would have no objection in filing the aforesaid information as required by the respondents. She submits that the same would be done within a period of one week from today. The impugned Order-in-Original and the impugned Order-in-Appeal are set aside - the respondents are requested .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ications for refund were rejected. 2. The applications filed by the petitioner for refund were rejected, principally, on the ground that the period covered under the refund applications did not match with the tax period for which GSTR-1 were filed. The petitioner had filed GSTR-1 on a quarterly basis but the refunds were applied on a monthly basis. 3. Ms Narain, learned counsel appearing for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y returns. In such case, monthly refund application could be processed further by the department. This observation may be taken only for the present case as per Honorable High Court s directions in the matter. 5. Ms Narain submits that the respondents are ready and willing to process the petitioner s claim(s) for refund, subject to certain information from the petitioner. 6. Ms Jain, lear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X