TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (11) TMI 973
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Services Tax (Amendment) Act, 2018' [hereinafter 'CGST (Amendment) Act 2018' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. 3. Be that as it may, Mr.Adithya Reddy learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that it may not be necessary to go into interpretation of the expression 'relevant date' qua CGST (Amendment) Act 2018 in the light of suo-moto orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein all limitation periods across the Board were extended. In other words, learned counsel submits that if the benefit of suo-moto orders by the Hon'ble Supreme Court made owing to Covid-19 situation is applied to the case on hand, the relevant date issue need not be gone into in this case on hand. 4. Ms.Amirta Dinakaran, learned Revenue counsel who accepts notice on behalf of lone respondent requests time to get instructions and revert to this Court. 5. List in the Admission Board i.e., 'Motion List' day after tomorrow i.e., on 03.09.2021.' 'Proceedings made on 03.09.2021 Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in previous listing on 01.09.2021, same set of learned counsel are bef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriod. Learned counsel submits that he has the benefit of suo-motu order of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 27.04.2021 made in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 in SMW(c) No.3/2020, a scanned reproduction of which is as follows: ORDER The Court is convened through Video Conferencing. This Court took suo motu cognizance of the situation arising out of the challenge faced by the country on account of COVID-19 Virus and resultant difficulties that could be faced by the litigants across the country. Consequently, it was directed vide order dated 23rd March, 2020 that the period of limitation in filing petitions/ applications/ suits/ appeals/ all other proceedings, irrespective of the period of limitation prescribed under the general or special laws, shall stand extended with effect from 15th March, 2020 till further orders. Thereafter on 8th March, 2021 it was noticed that the country is returning to normalcy and since all the Courts and Tribunals have started functioning either physically or by virtual mode, extension of limitation was regulated and brought to an end. The suo motu proceedings were, thus, disposed of issuing the following directions: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st of COVID-19 Virus, thus, requires extraordinary measures to minimize the hardship of litigant-public in all the states. We, therefore, restore the order dated 23rd March, 2020 and in continuation of the order dated 8th March, 2021 direct that the period(s) of limitation, as prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till further orders. It is further clarified that the period from 14th March, 2021 till further orders shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. We have passed this order in exercise of our powers under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Hence it shall be a binding order within the meaning of Article 141 on al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f and the same will be governed by these extensions of time granted by the statutes or notifications, if any.' 10. Therefore, the refund applications made on 19.04.2021 need to be entertained and the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly enures to the benefit of the writ petitioner in the case on hand. To that extent, the impugned orders are wrong. 11. Be that as it may, as the impugned orders, as already alluded to supra, say that they have examined the refund applications, learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that reasons for refund should have been recorded in the impugned orders as that is a requirement ingrained in Rule 92(3) of the 'Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017' [hereinafter 'said Rules' for the sake of convenience and clarity], which reads as follows: '92. Order sanctioning refund (1)...... (2) ..... (3) Where the proper officer is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded in writing that the whole or any part of the amount claimed as refund is not admissible or is not payable to the applicant, he shall issue a notice in FORM GST RFD-08 to the applicant, requiring him to furnish a reply i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... NO.1 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION PIL-M C SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Miscellaneous Application No. 6/2821 in SMW(C) No. 3/29029 IN RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION Petitioner(s) VERSUS Respondent(s) FOR ADMISSION and IA No.55367/2021-INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT and IA No.55869/2021-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS and IA No.55865/2021- APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION) Date: 27-04-2821 This Application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For the Parties: For applicant 'जयते Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Adv. Dr. Joseph S. Aristotle, Adv. Ms. Diksha Rai, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr Atulesh Kumar, Adv Dr. Aman Hingorani, Adv. Ms. Anzu Varkey, Adv. Mr Sachin Sharma, Adv. Mr. Aljo Joseph, Adv. WELLCOPY For Union of India For R.No.4 in SMWP 3/20 Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Rakrishna, AOR Mr. K.K. Venugopal, AG Mr. Tushar Mehta, So Mr. Rajat Nair, adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Siddhant....