9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 524 - HC - GSTRefund of IGST - export of Ply wood other than commercial plywood classified under the Customs Tariff Heading 44129990 - Section 163 (3) (b) of the IGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - This writ petition is directed with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the request of the petitioner as reflected from shipping bills referred to above for sanctioning the refund claims and interest thereon. Let this exercise be completed within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the judgment. In case no action is taken, the officer concerned is liable to pay cost of ₹ 25,000/-, which will be recovered from the salary of the officer.
Issues:
1. Eligibility for refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid on export of goods. 2. Delay in processing refund claims by the respondent. Analysis: Issue 1: Eligibility for refund of IGST The petitioner, a private limited company engaged in the business of supplying various types of plywoods, exported goods classified under the Customs Tariff Heading 44129990 on payment of IGST amounting to ?24,24,294. The petitioner contended that under Section 163 (3) (b) of the IGST Act, they were eligible for a refund of the IGST paid on the export of goods. Despite submitting shipping bills and follow-ups, the refund claims were not processed by the respondent. The court, without commenting on the merits of the matter, directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's request and sanction the refund claims along with interest within 45 days from the date of the judgment. Failure to take action would result in the officer concerned being liable to pay a cost of ?25,000, recoverable from the officer's salary. Issue 2: Delay in processing refund claims The learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent accepted notice and stated that the Department was willing to consider the petitioner's application. The court acknowledged the submission and emphasized the need for prompt action on the refund claims. The judgment highlighted the importance of timely processing of refund claims to ensure that exporters receive their entitled refunds without unnecessary delays. The court's directive aimed to expedite the refund process and hold the officer responsible for any inaction, thereby emphasizing the significance of efficient administration in dealing with refund claims under the IGST Act.
|
