TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Tax Refund Dispute Resolved: Administrative Fairness Prevails with Mandatory Reconsideration and Personal Hearing for Petitioner</h1> HC found procedural irregularity in tax refund denial, where respondent failed to consider petitioner's reply to show cause notices. Court remanded matter ... Refund of IGST - rejection on the ground that the petitioner did not respond to SCN and provide FIRC details - Violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is undisputed that the petitioner made an export of services and paid integrated taxes, subsequently claiming a refund on 13.04.2023 within the timeframe specified in Section 54 of the Act. In response, the first respondent issued a show cause notice dated 18.05.2023, stating that the FIRC details uploaded were in a non-openable format. The petitioner promptly addressed this issue by filing a rectified version of the FIRC details on 19.05.2023, i.e., on the next day itself. However, on 06.06.2023, the first respondent issued a second show cause notice without addressing the petitioner's response submitted on 19.05.2023 - the remarks in the order, which claims that the petitioner did not respond to the show cause notice or provide FIRC details, reflects a total non-application of mind on the part of the first respondent. The matter is remanded to the first respondent, who shall consider the reply filed by the petitioner on 19.05.2023 and, after issuing a clear 14-days notice specifying a date of personal hearing, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible - Petition disposed off by way of remand. The writ petition was filed to quash an order rejecting a refund claim for IGST paid. The petitioner responded to show cause notices and provided required details, but the order was passed without considering the petitioner's reply. The court remanded the matter back to the respondent for proper consideration and ordered a personal hearing within 14 days. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
