Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Exporters Win: Govt Ordered to Disburse 90% CGST/IGST Refund Within Four Weeks After Prolonged Delay HC granted a writ of mandamus compelling tax authorities to disburse 90% of sanctioned CGST and IGST refund for export goods in 2017-2018. The court ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Exporters Win: Govt Ordered to Disburse 90% CGST/IGST Refund Within Four Weeks After Prolonged Delay
HC granted a writ of mandamus compelling tax authorities to disburse 90% of sanctioned CGST and IGST refund for export goods in 2017-2018. The court directed the second respondent to refund the outstanding amount within four weeks, finding no valid justification for the prolonged delay in processing the refund.
Issues: 1. Delay in disbursement of sanctioned refund amount of CGST and IGST u/s Export of goods for the year 2017-2018. 2. Failure to refund 90% of CGST and IGST amount despite provisional and final sanction orders.
Issue 1: The petitioner, engaged in exporting natural rubber-based prevulcanised latex, sought a Writ of Mandamus for the disbursement of the sanctioned refund amount of 90% of CGST and IGST paid against the Export of goods for the year 2017-2018. The first respondent had provisionally sanctioned the refund orders for various months in 2018 and 2019 as per Rule 91(2) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. However, the petitioner had only received a portion of the refund amount, with 90% of the CGST and IGST remaining unpaid. Despite submitting bank authorization details, the refund had not been processed, leading to the filing of the writ petition.
Issue 2: Upon hearing both parties, it was evident that the first respondent had sanctioned the refund as per provisional and final orders. However, the second respondent had failed to provide any valid reason for the delay in refunding the remaining 90% of the CGST and IGST amount to the petitioner. The Court found that the amounts were rightfully due to the petitioner and directed the second respondent to refund the outstanding amount within four weeks from the date of the order, if not already paid, without imposing any costs.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.