High Court overturns Appellate Authority's GST refund denial, orders review and fair hearing

The High Court set aside the Appellate Authority's order rejecting a refund claim for excess GST payment, directing the petitioner to address identified issues in a representation. The Appellate Authority was instructed to grant a hearing to the petitioner and issue a new order promptly. The Court found the Appellate Authority's failure to verify the adjustment of excess tax and lack of opportunity for the petitioner to comment violated principles of natural justice. The writ petition was allowed with these directions and observations.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Incorrect issuance of invoices and subsequent GST payment.
2. Rejection of refund claim by the Adjudicating Authority.
3. Appeal against the rejection of the refund claim.
4. Examination of excess tax payment and its adjustment.
5. Principles of natural justice in the appellate process.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Incorrect Issuance of Invoices and Subsequent GST Payment:
The petitioner, a Private Limited Company, inadvertently issued two invoices for the transfer of goods between its two units in August 2017, which should have been covered by a delivery challan as per Section 7 of the CGST Act. Consequently, the petitioner did not declare these transfers as "outward supply" in the GSTR-01 for August 2017 but mistakenly included them in the GSTR-3B return, resulting in an excess GST payment of Rs. 15,84,598.

2. Rejection of Refund Claim by the Adjudicating Authority:
The petitioner filed for a refund of the excess GST paid under Section 54 of the CGST Act. However, the Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim, stating that there was no provision under the GST Act and Rules for refund of excess tax paid through ITC. This decision was communicated in an order dated 01.04.2019/02.04.2019.

3. Appeal Against the Rejection of the Refund Claim:
The petitioner appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), who found the Adjudicating Authority's ground for rejection erroneous but still denied the refund, concluding that no actual excess payment of tax had occurred. The petitioner then approached the High Court due to the absence of a Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal.

4. Examination of Excess Tax Payment and Its Adjustment:
The Appellate Authority held that the petitioner had rectified the error in GSTR-1 for August 2017, carrying forward the excess tax to offset against the output tax liability of the subsequent month. However, the High Court noted that this conclusion was based on presumption rather than actual examination of GSTR-1, GSTR-2, and GSTR-3B for September 2017. The Court found that the Appellate Authority did not verify whether the excess tax was indeed carried forward and adjusted.

5. Principles of Natural Justice in the Appellate Process:
The High Court emphasized that the Appellate Authority should have given the petitioner an opportunity to comment on the aspects it intended to examine further. The Court found that the Appellate Authority's inquiry, conducted without affording such an opportunity, violated the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion:
The High Court set aside the Appellate Authority's order dated 11.09.2019, directing the petitioner to file a representation addressing the issues identified in the Appellate Authority's order. The Appellate Authority was instructed to grant a hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh order expeditiously. The writ petition was allowed with these directions and observations.

---