Court orders reconsideration of refund application, citing deficiencies and lack of consideration.

The court set aside the refund rejection order and remanded the matter for reconsideration, directing the respondent to issue a reasoned order within four weeks. The decision addressed deficiencies in the claim, lack of consideration of the petitioner's response, and the need for compliance with the law in reviewing the refund application.

---

---

Issues:
1. Refund rejection order challenge based on deficiencies in the claim.
2. Lack of consideration of petitioner's reply and supporting material.
3. Remand for reconsideration of refund application.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an entity engaged in manufacturing and selling Ready-Mix Concrete, challenged the refund rejection order dated 20.11.2019, alleging deficiencies in the claim made for the refund. The supplies were made to SEZ Units in the financial year 2017-18 without payment of GST initially due to a misunderstanding regarding the submission of the Letter of Undertaking. However, the petitioner rectified the mistake by paying IGST in December 2017 with applicable interest and filed a refund application seeking refund of IGST on supplies made to SEZ Units in December 2017.

The competent authority, respondent No.1, issued a Deficiency Memo alleging deficiencies in the claim and advised the petitioner to rectify the refund application. The petitioner responded by clarifying the deficiencies and submitting supporting material, which was acknowledged by the respondent's office. Despite this, the refund claim was rejected on 20.11.2019 without considering the petitioner's reply and the material filed in response to the Deficiency Memo.

The court noted that the impugned order failed to reference the petitioner's reply to the Deficiency Memo, as admitted by the Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the refund rejection order and remitting the matter back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration of the petitioner's refund application and the accompanying letter and annexures. The respondent was directed to pass a reasoned order within four weeks from the date of receipt of the court's order.

In conclusion, the court's decision to set aside the refund rejection order and remand the matter for reconsideration addresses the key issues of deficiencies in the claim, lack of consideration of the petitioner's response, and the need for a reasoned order in compliance with the law.

---