2024 (5) TMI 314 - HC - GST

Refund Claim Reconsidered: HC Overturns Dismissal Due to Expired Limitation, Orders Fresh Review Under CGST Act.

The HC set aside the impugned order dismissing the refund claim under section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, due to an expired limitation period. The case was ... Time Limitation for filing refund claim - Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic - whether refund claim has to be filed by the exporter two years from the date of shipment? - HELD THAT:- In this case, the exports were made by the petitioner between 24.04.2018 to 25.02.2019. It is evident that the last date for filing the refund claim would have expired at the time when the country was under partial/intermittent/full lockdown due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic from third week of March 2020. The Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of this earlier extended the period of limitation. Taking note of the same, the Central Government also promulgated an ordinance called Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Ordinary 2020, which was replaced by TOLA Act 2020. The Central Government has now issued notification No.13/2022-Central Tax dated 15.07.2022. By virtue of the above notification, the period from 1st day of March 2020 to 28th of February 2022 for computation for period of limitation for filing refund claim U/s.54 or under 55 of the CGST Act 2017 has been excluded. It is noticed that neither the 1st respondent nor the 2nd respondent had the benefit of the above notification when the orders were passed. Under these circumstances, impugned order upholding the rejection of the refund claim of the 2nd respondent are set aside and the case is remitted back to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the petitioner's refund claim afresh in the light of the above mentioned notification. Petition allowed by way of remand. Issues:The issues involved in the judgment are the rejection of a refund claim under section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 due to the expiration of the limitation period for filing the claim, and the subsequent applicability of a notification excluding certain periods for computation of the limitation period.Summary:1. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to challenge the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dismissing the appeal against the original order related to a refund claim under section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner had exported goods and claimed a refund, but the claim was rejected due to the expiration of the limitation period for filing the claim.2. The petitioner exported goods between April 2018 and February 2019, and the limitation period for filing the refund claim had expired during the Covid-19 lockdown in March 2020. The Central Government issued a notification excluding certain periods for computation of the limitation period, which the respondents were not aware of when passing the impugned order.3. The High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the case back to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the petitioner's refund claim in light of the notification excluding certain periods for computation of the limitation period. The 1st respondent was directed to pass a fresh order on the refund claim expeditiously, preferably within six months, and provide the petitioner with a hearing if needed for clarification.4. The Writ Petition was allowed with the above observations, and no costs were imposed. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed, and the parties were advised to file suitable applications for reviewing the order if necessary.Separate Judgement:No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.