TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 236
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... IEC code number. The petitioner has undertaken the export in question, the details in regard to such exports namely the invoices are placed on record. The petitioner having claimed duty drawback at a higher rate on all these exports appears to be an admitted position. The petitioner filed GST returns for the said period in form GSTR-01 for July/August as also in form GSTR-3B for July 2017 and August 2017 which are annexed at Exhibit "E to E3" in the petition. The petitioner contends that the Central Board of Excise and Customs (for short "CBIC") had issued circular No. 05/2018 dated 23 February 2018 providing an alternative mechanism to give exporters an opportunity to rectify errors committed in the initial stages. Similar circular was issued on 29 May 2018. 3. The petitioner has contended that by its letter dated 27 August 2018 and 11 July 2019 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner (IGST Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House) a request was made for amendment in the shipping bills. On 14 September 2019, such application was rejected for each of the shipping bills. Thereafter, by an E-mail dated 10 February 2020, the respondent authority informed the petitioner that the petitioner had a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provisions inter alia of which CGST Act 2017 as also the Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST-2017) and rules framed thereunder had become applicable. It is contended that in the present case the Goods were exported under the payment of IGST. It is contended that at the time of export, the petitioner claimed and availed higher rate of drawback by suffixing A to drawback serial number. It is contended that ICES system sanctioned drawback of Rs. 12,02,230/- in respect of all four Shipping Bills and automatically rejected IGST amount paid by the petitioner in terms of Notification No.131/2016 dated 31 October 2016 (as amended by Notification No.59-2017 dated 26 June 2017 and dated 26 July 2017). It is contended that in respect of Shipping Bills No.8026031 dated 16 July 2017, the ICES system sanctions IGST of Rs.24,739/- out of a total IGST of Rs.3,65,449/-paid by the petitioner. The department has next contended that in respect of some items where the petitioner had either claimed lower rate of drawback by suffixing 'B' to drawback serial numbers or the petitioner had not claimed any drawback against the goods. The department contended that now, the petitioner is claiming refund of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssion in the decision of this Court in Sunlight Cable Industries (supra) assist the conclusion: "9. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. We have also perused the record. Section 54 of the CGST Act provides for refund of tax, which would entitle the Assessee to claim any refund of tax and interest or any other amount paid by him by making an application before the expiry of two years from the relevant date in such form and manner as may be prescribed. Explanation below Section 54 provides for refund, which includes refund of tax paid on zero rated supplies of goods or services or both or on inputs services, etc. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the case of the Petitioner is a case of zero rated supply under Section 16(3) of the IGST Act. In these circumstances, Rule 96 of the CGST Rules, which provides for refund of integrated tax paid on goods or services exported out of India had become applicable. On this, there is no dispute. 10. In such circumstances, the only question, which is required to be determined is as to whether the Respondents are correct in their assertion that in making the refund as claimed by the Petitioner the Petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s claimed drawback of the customs component only for their exports and there arises no question of denying the refund of IGST. The rationale for not allowing the refund of IGST for those exporters, who claim higher duty drawback is that the higher duty drawback reflects the elements of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax taken together and since higher duty drawback is already being availed than granting the IGST refund would amount to double benefit as the Central Excise and Service Tax has been subsumed in the GST. In the case of the writ-applicant, the drawback rates being the same, it represents only the Customs elements, which did not get subsumed in the GST and thus, the writ-applicant cannot be said to have availed double benefit i.e. of the IGST refund and higher duty drawback. 11. In the result, this petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to immediately sanction the refund towards the IGST paid in respect to the goods exported i.e. 'Zero Rated Supplies' made vide the shipping bills. It appears that the writ-applicant has also prayed to pay interest at the rate of 9% on the amount of refund from the date of shipping bill till the ....