9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the petitioners and learned advocate Mr. Hirak Shah for the respondents. 2. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities to sanction the refund of IGST of Rs. 19,44,122/- paid in regard to the goods exported by the petitioner by shipping bill nos.7542580 dated 12.09.2018 and 8531969 dated 27.10.2018. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: 3.1. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has exported the goods but inadvertently did not include the amount of IGST paid by the petitioner in Form GSTR-1 for the relevant month. However, the petitioner included the amount of IGST paid in Form GSTR-3B as well as Form GSTR-9 file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner thereafter by various communications, representations and letters dated 12.07.2019 onwards, requested the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner the refund of the IGST paid on the "Zero Rate Supplies". The petitioner also made representation on 05.01.2021 for refund of the aforesaid amount. The petitioner also filed the CA certificate and undertaking pursuant to the Circular no.12 of 2018-Cus dated 29.05.2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) prescribing the procedure for sanction of pending IGST refund claims where the records have not been transmitted from GSTN to DG systems. As the case of the petitioner was covered by clause 3A of the said circular. 3.5. The petitioner received letter dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner which contains the error as stated herein above. 4.2. Reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in case of Rameswar Udyog Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Union of India in Special Civil Application No. 17688 of 2019 rendered on 18.03.2021. 4.3. It was therefore submitted that the respondent authorities may be directed to manually process the refund and credit the amount in the account of the petitioner. 5. On the other hand learned advocate Mr. Hirak Shah for the respondents submitted that but for the computer system not permitting the refund to the petitioner, the petitioner is otherwise eligible to the refund for the two shipping bills for which the petitioner has paid the IGST as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
