https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373138 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that they fulfilled all requirements for claiming a refund under rule 96 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The court found that none of the circumstances justifying withholding a refund under sub-rule (4) of rule 96 were applicable in this case. The court also noted that Circular No.37/2018-Customs dated 9.10.2018 was irrelevant to the matter, as the petitioner had already rectified any issues by returning the differential drawback amount. Consequently, the court directed the respondents to grant the refund to the petitioner. en-us Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 10:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373138 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that they fulfilled all requirements for claiming a refund under rule 96 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The court found that none of the circumstances justifying withholding a refund under sub-rule (4) of rule 96 were applicable in this case. The court also noted that Circular No.37/2018-Customs dated 9.10.2018 was irrelevant to the matter, as the petitioner had already rectified any issues by returning the differential drawback amount. Consequently, the court directed the respondents to grant the refund to the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373138