Court denies tax refund on exported goods due to availing duty drawback; judicial review not justified.

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking a refund of IGST and CGST on exported goods. The court held that the rejection of the refund claim by the tax authority, based on the petitioner availing duty drawback on export goods, did not amount to gross illegality or lack of jurisdiction justifying judicial review under Article 226. The court emphasized that the appellate authority should address eligibility for refunds, and upheld the tax authority's decision, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures in tax refund matters under the GST laws.

---

---

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 for refund claim.
2. Eligibility for refund of IGST and CGST on export of goods.
3. Rejection of refund claim by tax authority based on duty drawback availed.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, an exporter of fresh fruits and vegetables registered under the GST Act, sought refund of IGST and CGST under the provisions of the IGST Act and CGST Act. The petitioner contended that despite the exported goods being exempted from tax, they had incurred expenses on packing materials and freight charges, making them eligible for refund. The petitioner approached the court under Article 226, bypassing the appeal process. However, the court emphasized that for judicial review, the petitioner must establish gross illegality, irregularity, lack of jurisdiction, or violation of natural justice, which was not demonstrated in this case.

2. The petitioner had filed refund applications for IGST and CGST with supporting documents, but the tax authority rejected the claim citing the availing of duty drawback on export goods. The court noted that the rejection was based on the duty drawback availed by the petitioner at 1% of FOB value, leading to the inadmissibility of the refund for CGST and IGST. The court refrained from delving into the eligibility of the petitioner for the refund, stating that such matters fall within the appellate authority's purview if the petitioner chooses to pursue the remedy through the appropriate channels.

3. The court concluded that the reason for rejecting the refund claim, i.e., the availing of duty drawback on export goods, did not warrant interference under writ jurisdiction. The tax authority had considered all relevant factors, including the duty drawback availed by the petitioner, in denying the refund. The court upheld the authority's decision and dismissed the writ petition, stating that no grounds for interference were established. The judgment highlighted the importance of following the prescribed legal procedures and avenues for seeking redressal in matters concerning tax refunds and eligibility criteria under the GST laws.

---