TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 751
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or short, 'CGST Act'] and the Sanction Order dated 15.11.2022 as per Annexure-G and in fact, the third respondent by the aforesaid order dated 15.11.2022 has rejected the petitioner's claim for refund for the period between April 2021 to June 2021. Sri.Chidananda Urs B.G., the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, the learned standing counsel for the respondents, are heard for final disposal of this petition. 2. It is undisputed that the petitioner's applications for refund for the period between [i] January 2020 and March 2020 and [ii] April 2020 and June 2020 are allowed, and the petitioner has also received refund. However, the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 14.09.2022 under Section 74 of the CGST Act is issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from its registered office at Kolkata and as such e-BRCs are addressed to its Kolkata office but it relates to its Bengaluru unit. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, the impugned Show Cause Notice is issued alleging that e-BRCs could possibly be misused to claim refund "across other ports" in the country. 4. Sri Chidananda Urs B.G. argues that this would be incongruous given the fact that e-BRCs are issued for specific invoices on submission of declaration as contemplated under the Foreign Exchange Management [Export of Goods and Services] Regulations 2015, and given the elaborate and defined procedure, e-BRCs are specific to certain transactions and they cannot be used for multiple refunds. 5. Sri Chidanand Urs B.G. next emphasizes that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efund for the subsequent period would be in jeopardy creating financial constraints for the petitioner. 8. At the outset, this Court must observe that the order rejecting refund [Annexure-G] cannot be sustained as it is premised only on the ground that show cause notice is issued for the earlier two periods, and the petitioner cannot be relegated to avail statutory remedy when it is undisputed that on examination of the critical issue viz., whether the e- BRCs relied upon by the petitioner relates to the Bengaluru unit, the petitioner is permitted refund. The impugned order dated 15.11.2022 rejecting refund must yield, and the proceedings restored to the second respondent to consider the same subject to the outcome of the proceedings that ....