https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405011 The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging rejection of input tax credit refund claim for export services. The court held that the proper officer violated principles of natural justice by rejecting the refund application without granting a hearing to the petitioner. Section 54(7) of CGST Act and Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules mandate that refund applications cannot be rejected without providing opportunity of being heard. The court emphasized that telephonic conversations and email exchanges cannot substitute formal hearing requirements. The matter was remanded to original authority for fresh decision after providing proper hearing to the petitioner. en-us Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Mar 2025 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405011 The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging rejection of input tax credit refund claim for export services. The court held that the proper officer violated principles of natural justice by rejecting the refund application without granting a hearing to the petitioner. Section 54(7) of CGST Act and Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules mandate that refund applications cannot be rejected without providing opportunity of being heard. The court emphasized that telephonic conversations and email exchanges cannot substitute formal hearing requirements. The matter was remanded to original authority for fresh decision after providing proper hearing to the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405011