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>Refund Application Rejection Violated Natural Justice; Case Sent Back for Reconsideration with Personal Hearing Mandate.</h1> <h3>M/s. Resource Unlimited Rep by its Proprietor Arul Kannan Versus The Joint Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Appeals), The Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Tirupur Division, Tirupur</h3> The HC set aside the orders of the first and second respondents, identifying a violation of natural justice due to the rejection of refund applications ... Refund claim - claim rejected without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- From a mere reading of Rule 92(3) of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, it is crystal clear that the no application for refund shall be rejected without giving the applicant an opportunity of being heard. However, in the instant case, the same has not been followed which is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the order passed by the first respondent dated 26.07.2022 as well as the Second Respondent dated 20.01.2020. While setting aside the order, this Court remits the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass orders afresh in the applications made by the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law. Petition allowed by way of remand. Issues:The Writ Petition challenges the order made by the first respondent in confirming the order passed by the second respondent regarding the rejection of two refund applications without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.Summary:The petitioner filed two refund applications which were rejected without a personal hearing, violating Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017. The petitioner appealed to the first respondent, who also upheld the rejection without considering the lack of a hearing. The Court noted the violation of natural justice and remitted the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration with a personal hearing.Detailed Summary:Issue 1: Rejection of refund applications without personal hearingThe petitioner's refund applications were rejected without providing a personal hearing, contrary to Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017. The first respondent upheld the rejection without addressing the lack of a hearing, leading to a violation of natural justice.Issue 2: Violation of principles of natural justiceThe failure to afford the petitioner a personal hearing before rejecting the refund applications goes against the principles of natural justice as outlined in Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017. The Court emphasized that no application for refund should be rejected without giving the applicant an opportunity to be heard.Court's DecisionThe Court set aside the orders of the first and second respondents and remitted the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration. The Court directed the second respondent to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and make a decision on the refund applications in accordance with the law. The Writ Petition was allowed with the specified directions, and no costs were awarded in this matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
