2020 (12) TMI 582

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s the tribunal envisaged in the GST Act has not been constituted, the petitioner has approached this court as the petitioner cannot be left remediless. That facts in brief are that the petitioner claims to be a registered supplier under the GST Act and claims to have done job work on cloth and other suppliers for the period April, 2018 to July, 2018. The petitioner submits that on account of inward supply of inverted rated inputs the petitioner was entitled to refund. As such, he filed an application for refund in Form RFD-01 claiming a refund of Rs. 13,68,758/- under inverted duty structure on the portal for the period April 2018 to July 2018. The said application was allotted a number and was dated 24.02.2020. The respondent no. 2 on 19.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce of this notice. .You are also directed to appear before the undersigned on 26/03/2020 3:41 PM If you fail to furnish a reply within the stipulated date or fail to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and time the case will be decided ex parte on the basis of available records and on merits. Remark turnover of inverted rated supply is 36346489/-, whereas as per rfd 01, is 110701018/- which is more pls clarify the same Date : 19/03/2020 3:44 PM Signature (DSC)   Place : DIVISION IV GHAZIABAD Name of Proper HARSH ARDHAN RAI   Designation Assistant Commissioner   Office Address DIVISION IV GHAZIABAD" The petitioner claims that he could not filed reply to the said show cause notice because o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er, perusal thereof does not show any reason for order being passed by the respondent no. 2 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the said order dated 07.04.2020 (made available on 19.06.2020) by filing an appeal before respondent no. 1, which was dismissed on 14.09.2020 (Annexure No. 9). The appellate order, rejecting the appeal, was passed on the ground that the petitioner had not given any reply to the show cause notice and further it records that even at the appellate stage the appellant did not submit any document to justify the support of refund claim. The counsel for the petitioner argues that all the documents in support of refund claim were duly filed along with the refund application and were du....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... notice it is clear that the third respondent has demonstrated a totally close mind at the stage of show cause notice itself. Such a close mind is inconsistent with the scheme of Rule 43 which is set out below. The aforesaid rule has been framed in exercise of the power conferred under Section 33 of The Marine Products Export development Authority Act, 1972 and as such that Rule is statutory in nature." On the strength of the said judgment, counsel for the petitioner argues that as the show cause notice was silent, the petitioner could not have been expected to give any reply and further questioning the appellate order he argues that the appellate authority was wrong in recording that no document has been produced, as the application of th....