TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 926
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 28/6/2017 the date when the provisions for refund and calculation of IGST under the CGST Act and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the "IGST Act") had not been notified. On 1 July 2017, certain provisions of CGST Act and Goods and Services Act came into force. In the year 2017 the Government of India enacted the CGST Act, IGST Act and certain other Acts for introduction of a single unified tax system for imposition of one tax across the country that is Goods and Services Tax (GST). 2. Petitioner No.1 exported certain goods on 28/6/2017 from Jawaharlal Nehru Port, Nhava Sheva. The formalities pertaining to printing of shipping bill etc were undertaken at the Port. It is petitioner's case that as per the practice pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar No.26/2017-Customs dated 1/7/2017, petitioner No.1 was not required to file any separate application for refund of IGST paid on supply of goods for exports. Shipping bill since had all details including IGST, invoice details was to be deemed to be an application for refund itself. As petitioner did not receive the refund of IGST of Rs. 22,92,587/- on or about 16/9/2018 petitioner approached the customs office to check the status of its refund. Petitioner No.1 was informed that unless export data was transmitted from GSTN (GST Network) to ICEGATE (Indian Customs Electronic Gateway), the Customs office would not be in position to process the refund claim. Petitioner had no control or role to play in the transmission of data from GSTN to I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs which reads as under: "There is no information received from GSTN for this shipping bills. Through office interface, IGST amount can be refunded which gets reflected in system as per information from GSTN. Raise issue with GSTN helpdesk" 5. Notwithstanding all these efforts put by petitioner No.1 and notwithstanding the fact that there was no denial of petitioner No.1's entitlement to get the refund of Rs. 22,92,587/-, respondents chose to keep quiet. 6. On finding no other option, petitioner approached this Court by way of this petition. On 7/9/2021 following order came to be passed. "1. It appears from the affidavit of service tendered in Court today that the respondent no.6 (Joint Director, Directorate Gene....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore this Court on the returnable date, i.e., September 28, 2021." Notwithstanding this order respondent No.6 has chosen not to take a decision on the communication from respondent No.4. At least nothing has been placed on record by respondents. 7. On 28/9/2021 Shri Kantharia appeared for respondents and sought time to file reply. Time was granted upto 8/10/2021 and the matter stood over to today. Today Shri Kantharia sought further 3 weeks to file reply on written instructions which the Court was not inclined to grant and rejected the request. This is because first of all, as recorded in the affidavit of service, the petition was served on or before 31/8/2021 and Shri Sawant who is instructing Shri Kantharia, also appeared on....