Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (8) TMI 647

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that claim ought to have been dealt with and disposed of within 60 days of its receipt. It is also not in dispute, by virtue of Section 56, any delay beyond statutory period of 60 days in dealing with the claim for refund, the revenue entailed the interest liability @ 6% from the end of period of 60 days. In the first place, there is no contrary opinion existing and perhaps none may arise as the language of the statute as it stands admits of no doubt. As to the filing of physical/offline application on 02.04.2019, there is no doubt raised by the revenue. Therefore, that application had been filed within the statutory period of two years from the date when the refund became due i.e., upon the first appeal order dated 09.03.2018 being passed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the truck bearing registration No. WB 11 B 2531 was detained by respondent no. 3 on the allegation of improper documentation giving rise to further allegation of smuggling of those goods inside the State of U.P. 4. Consequently, the goods were seized on 22.02.2018. That seizure order gave rise to further order under Section 20 of the IGST Act read with Section 129(3) of the UP GST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Consequently, tax Rs. 23,66,020/- and equal penalty, totaling to Rs. 47,32,040/- was demanded from the petitioner. 5. It is the petitioner's case that it furnished security in the shape of bank guarantee for the above amount, on 15.03.2018. Before the petitioner could have availed any remedy in appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... provisions of law, it has been pointed out, the petitioner was effectively prevented from moving the online application owing to technical glitches that existed on the GSTN portal. Relying on the pleadings made in paragraph no.23 of the writ petition and its lack of denial in the counter affidavit, it has been then submitted, the petitioner had moved its physical application to claim the refund within the statutory period of 60 days, by filing such application before respondent no.3 on 02.04.2019. Further, applications filed by it on 15.04.2019, 29.05.2019 and 04.07.2019 remained unattended. 11. Referring to Rule 97-A and relying on its interpretation made by a division bench of this Court (to which one of us was a member), it has been sub .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t to have been dealt with and disposed of within 60 days of its receipt. It is also not in dispute, by virtue of Section 56, any delay beyond statutory period of 60 days in dealing with the claim for refund, the revenue entailed the interest liability @ 6% from the end of period of 60 days. 15. As to the maintainability of the refund claim made by the petitioner, it is not in doubt, the petitioner did make an offline application claiming such refund on 02.04.2019. Rule 97-A of the Rules, reads as below : "97-A. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, in respect of any process or procedure prescribed herein, any reference to electronic filing of an application, intimation, reply, declaration, statement or electronic issua .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ated 09.03.2018 being passed. Therefore, the revenue authorities were obligated in law to deal with that application in terms of Section 54(7) of the Act, within a period of 60 days. Failing that, the revenue further became exposed to discharge interest liability on the delay in making the refund at the statutory rate from the end of 60 days from 02.06.2019. 18. Accordingly, a writ of mandamus is issued to respondent no. 3 to dispose of the petitioner's refund claim application dated 02.04.2019 in light of the observations made above and to pay up the amount of refund claim together with statutory interest, within a period of three months from today. 19. In view of the above, present petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
Case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates