2025 (3) TMI 317 - HC - GST

Exporter Wins IGST Refund Battle: Administrative Circular Cannot Limit Statutory Rights Under Rule 96

The Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Union of India Versus M/s. Modern India Products, Represented by its Managing Partner, S. Uma Maheswaran

HC ruled in favor of the exporter, affirming their right to claim IGST refund under Rule 96 despite a circular suggesting otherwise. The court held that ... Refund of IGST - zero rated supply - duty drawback is claimed - HELD THAT:- The Hon'ble Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in M/s.Amit Cotton Industries Through Partner, Veljibhai Virjibhai Ranipa Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs [2019 (7) TMI 472 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] had categorically held that the aforesaid circular cannot prevail over Rule 96. The Hon'ble Division Bench observed that the circular will not save the situation for the Department. This decision was followed by the Madras High Court in M/s.Precot Meridian Limited Vs The Commissioner of Customs, The Assistant Commissioner of Customs [2020 (1) TMI 90 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. It is also informed that several other High Courts have also taken the very same view. Since the learned single Judge granted relief to the writ petitioner only by following the existing legal position, interference with the said order is not warranted. Appeal dismissed. The Madras High Court heard an appeal regarding the refund of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) for an exporter of 'absorbent gauze roll.' The exporter claimed entitlement to a refund under Sections 16 and 54 of the IGST Act read with Rule 96 of CGST Rules. The court noted that a circular stating that if duty drawback is claimed, IGST refund cannot be sought does not prevail over Rule 96. The court referenced a Gujarat High Court decision and a previous Madras High Court decision supporting this interpretation. As the single Judge's decision granting relief to the petitioner aligned with the existing legal position, the appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.