2023 (9) TMI 857 - HC - GST

GST Refund Dispute Resolved: Petitioner Granted Opportunity to File Representation for Expedited Review

M/s Maa Vindhya Vasini Constructions, Through Its Partner Om Prakash Tripathi Versus State Of U.P. And 6 Others

HC allowed petitioner's claim regarding GST refund discrepancy. The court directed petitioner to file representation within two weeks to Respondent No.7, ... Refund of GST - Petitioner seeking permission to approach the Respondent No.7 by way of appropriate representation, which may be directed to be decided within time frame fixed by this Court - HELD THAT:- It is opined that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the writ petition pending and, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to approach the Respondent No.7 by filing an appropriate representation clearly stating his grievance within a period of two weeks from today. In the eventuality, the petitioner files representation within time allowed, it is expected that the Respondent No.7 shall proceed to consider all aspects of the matter and decide the same by speaking and reasoned order, expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of service of a certified copy of this order. Petition disposed off. Issues involved: Discrepancy in GST refund amount; Petitioner seeking refund of GST at 18%, but granted at 12%; Petitioner's representation before Respondent No.7.Judgment Summary:Discrepancy in GST refund amount: The petitioner had carried out work contract for the respondents and claimed refund of GST at 18%, whereas it was granted at 12%. The petitioner's grievance was that the refund amount was not as per the entitlement. The court noted the discrepancy and allowed the petitioner to approach Respondent No.7 by filing a representation clearly stating the grievance within two weeks. The Respondent No.7 was directed to consider the representation and decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from the date of service of the court's order.Petitioner's representation before Respondent No.7: The court disposed of the writ petition, as it found no useful purpose in keeping it pending. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to present the grievance before Respondent No.7 through an appropriate representation. The court emphasized that the Respondent No.7 should consider all aspects of the matter and provide a reasoned decision within a specified timeframe. This direction aimed at ensuring a fair review of the petitioner's claim for GST refund at the correct rate.Conclusion: The court's decision allowed the petitioner to seek redressal for the discrepancy in the GST refund amount by approaching the relevant authority with a clear representation. The emphasis on a timely and reasoned decision by Respondent No.7 aimed at resolving the issue efficiently and in accordance with the petitioner's entitlement.