TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>IGST Refund on Exported Goods During Transitional Period to be Processed Within Two Weeks</h1> <h3>MAXAM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.</h3> The HC addressed a challenge to provisions in IGST Act, CGST Act, and CGST Rules, specifically Paragraph 11(d) and 12A(a)(ii) of certain notifications ... Refund of IGST - goods exported during transitional period - Constitutional Validity of Paragraph 11(d) read with 12A(a)(ii) of the Notes and Conditions of the Notification dated 31st October, 2016 [as amended by Notification dated 29th June 2017 and Notification dated 26th July, 2017], Circular No.37/2018 dated 09th October 2018 - vires of Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 read with Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 96 of CGST Rules, 2017 and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India - HELD THAT:- The respondents are directed to scrutinize and sanction the refund of the petitioner within two weeks. List on 18th May, 2022. Issues:Challenge to the validity of certain provisions of notifications under IGST Act, CGST Act, and CGST Rules. Claim for refund of IGST paid on exported goods during the Transitional Period.Analysis:The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the validity of Paragraph 11(d) along with 12A(a)(ii) of specific notifications, alleging them to be ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act, Section 54 of the CGST Act, and Rule 96 of the CGST Rules. The petitioner contended that these provisions were violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The prayer included a request for directions to grant a refund of IGST paid on exported goods during the Transitional Period, along with appropriate interest. The High Court issued notice to the respondents, and the advocates representing the respondents accepted the notice on their behalf.The senior standing counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3 informed the court that they were processing the refund claim of the petitioner. He requested two weeks to scrutinize and sanction the refund. In response to this request, the court directed the respondents to scrutinize and sanction the refund within the specified two-week period. The matter was listed for further hearing on a specific date in May 2022.This judgment reflects the court's intervention in a matter concerning the challenge to the validity of certain provisions under the GST laws and the claim for a refund of IGST paid on exported goods. The court's direction for expeditious processing of the refund claim demonstrates the judicial oversight to ensure timely resolution of disputes related to tax refunds and compliance with constitutional provisions. The case highlights the significance of legal remedies available to taxpayers to seek redressal against perceived legal infirmities in tax laws and administrative actions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
