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>Duty Drawback and IGST Refund: Court Orders Decision on Pending Applications Within Four Weeks, Guarantees Personal Hearing</h1> <h3>R.K. Copper and Alloy LLP Versus Union of India, Member GST, Central board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, New Delhi, Commissioner of CGST Mumbai, Principal Chief Commissioner of GST Mumbai</h3> R.K. Copper and Alloy LLP Versus Union of India, Member GST, Central board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, New Delhi, Commissioner of CGST Mumbai, ... Issues:Petition for writ of mandamus seeking refund of IGST and duty drawback, pending applications for refund, investigations by Respondents, applicability of Circulars and judgments, direction for decision on refund applications, granting personal hearing, provisional refund order, communication of decision, right to file further proceedings, court's neutrality on merits, notice for hearing, disposal of writ petition.Analysis:The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Respondents to sanction a refund of IGST and duty drawback amounts along with interest and provisional refund. The applications for refund were pending, and there was no response from the Respondents. The Respondents mentioned ongoing investigations. The petitioner's counsel cited Circulars and a judgment from the Telangana High Court to support their contention that the refund cannot be withheld. The court directed Respondent No. 3 to decide on the refund applications within four weeks, considering relevant Circulars and the Telangana High Court judgment. The Respondent was also instructed to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner before making a decision.If further investigation is needed, a provisional refund order must be issued within the prescribed time. The order must be communicated to the petitioner within a week, with reasons recorded. If the decision is adverse, the petitioner can take appropriate action. The court clarified its neutrality on the merits of the case, keeping all contentions open. Respondent No. 3 must provide clear notice before any hearing. The writ petition was disposed of with the rule made absolute, and no costs were awarded. The parties were instructed to act based on an authenticated copy of the order.
TaxTMI 