2020 (9) TMI 978

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ck Division (OP No.1) in rejecting the refund of unutilized ITC to the petitioner-Company accumulated taking into account of inverted duty structure. The petitioner-Company further prays for a direction to the opposite party No.1 to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law taking into consideration the Circular No.59/33/2018-GST dated 04.09.2018 (Annexure-4) issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as for consequential reliefs. 3. Mr.Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner-Company submits that the petitioner- Company is a manufacturer of fertilizer registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the same. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted its reply to the show cause notice under Annexure-2 by submitting its reply dated 15.04.2020 under Annexure-3. However, the opposite party No.1, without considering the reply filed by the petitioner as at Annexure-3 and without assigning any reason whatsoever, passed the impugned order dated 06.05.2020 under Annexure-5. It is his submission that the impugned order under Annexure-5 discloses a complete non-application of mind, which has been passed in a pre-designed printed format generated electronically in the system. He also made elaborate argument in support of his entitlement of refund claimed under Annexure-1 relying upon the Circular of the Board as at Annexure-4. He, therefore prays to....