2022 (10) TMI 179 - HC - GST

Tax Refund Victory: Authorities Must Process CGST Claims Within 12 Weeks, Excluding Pandemic Period Under Section 54

HC ruled in favor of petitioners regarding CGST refund claims. The court directed authorities to process refund applications within 12 weeks, considering ... Refund of CGST - time limit specified for computing of period of limitation in filling the refund application - Notification dated 5.7.2022 bearing No. 13/2022 - section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The competent authority of the respondents is directed to process in accordance with law the claim of refund of the petitioners in each of the captioned petitions treating it within time and grant refund with statutory interest, if the petitioners are found eligible. The exercise shall be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Petition disposed off. Issues:1. Refusal of refund by authorities based on belated filing under section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.2. Interpretation and application of Notification No. 13/2022 dated 5th July, 2022, issued by the Central Government regarding the time limit for filing refund applications under the CGST Act.Analysis:1. The petitions sought to set aside the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) and Assistant Commissioner regarding the non-grant of CGST refund to the petitioners and requested the sanction of the refund. The authorities had contended that the refund applications were filed belatedly under section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017. However, both parties agreed that the Notification dated 5th July, 2022, issued by the Central Government, excluded the time limit for filing refund applications. This exclusion was crucial in determining the timeliness of the petitioners' refund claims.2. The Notification, in particular clause (ii), excluded the period from 1st March, 2020, to 28th February, 2022, for the computation of the period of limitation for filing refund applications under section 54 of the CGST Act. The learned advocate for the respondents did not dispute this aspect and produced an email confirming the application of the Notification to the petitioners' case. Consequently, the competent authority was directed to process the refund claims of the petitioners within the specified time frame of 12 weeks from the date of the order, provided the petitioners were found eligible for the refund along with statutory interest.3. The judgment clarified the impact of the Notification on the petitioners' refund claims, emphasizing the need for authorities to consider the revised time limit for filing refund applications under the CGST Act. By acknowledging the exclusion of the specified period for limitation computation, the court ensured that the petitioners' claims were evaluated within the extended timeframe, highlighting the importance of regulatory notifications in addressing procedural matters under tax laws.