9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (5) TMI 764 - HC - GSTSeeking some mechanism for filing an undertaking for the purpose of re-crediting the rejected refund amount - simple prayer that the Petitioner seeks is for enabling him to submit the undertaking by way of PMT-03 forms in respect of all his applications and nothing more - HELD THAT - The entire issue is very small which can be resolved with the help of the GST Network. From what has been submitted the above mentioned procedure which is prescribed by the GST Network does not seem to be working insofar as the Petitioner is concerned. The Petitioner has also raised a ticket bearing no. 2024032211843933 in respect of the same by way of email but the same is yet to be resolved. The Petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Officer at the GSTN Office Aerocity New Delhi on 14th May 2025 at 11 30 a.m. Petition disposed off.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal questions considered by the Court were:
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1: Requirement and Procedure for Submission of Undertaking (PMT-03) for Re-crediting Rejected Refund Amount The legal framework governing Goods and Services Tax (GST) refunds and re-crediting of rejected amounts is embedded within the GST laws and rules, which mandate that when a refund application is rejected, the taxpayer may either file an appeal or submit an undertaking to re-credit the rejected amount back to the electronic credit ledger. The PMT-03 form is the prescribed mode for submitting such undertaking online. The Court noted that the Deputy Commissioner's order explicitly offered the Petitioner two options upon rejection of the refund application: to file an appeal or to submit an undertaking via PMT-03 for re-crediting the inadmissible refund amount. This is consistent with the procedural safeguards and mechanisms under the GST regime to ensure due process and proper accounting of tax credits. The Respondent's counsel outlined the prescribed procedure for submitting the PMT-03 form through the GST portal, which involves accessing the case details page, selecting the ORDERS tab, and clicking a hyperlinked icon to upload the undertaking. This procedure is designed to be user-friendly and accessible to taxpayers. Issue 2: Non-Functionality of the GST Portal for Submission of Undertaking by the Petitioner The Petitioner contended that despite repeated attempts, the GST portal did not enable them to upload or submit the PMT-03 undertaking form. The Petitioner also contacted the GST Department help desk without receiving any response, and raised a technical ticket which remained unresolved. This raised the issue of the operational efficacy of the GST Network portal and the accessibility of the prescribed mechanism for taxpayers. The Court observed that the prescribed procedure, while clear in theory, was not functioning effectively in the Petitioner's case. The inability to submit the undertaking online effectively denied the Petitioner the statutory option to re-credit the rejected refund amount, thereby causing prejudice. Issue 3: Judicial Intervention and Appropriate Relief Given the Petitioner's inability to avail the prescribed online mechanism despite willingness to comply, the Court considered whether judicial intervention was warranted to facilitate the Petitioner's statutory rights. The Court recognized that the issue was essentially technical and administrative, relating to the functionality of the GST Network portal. Rather than issuing a direction to the GST authorities to unilaterally enable the portal, the Court directed the Petitioner's official to personally approach the GST Network Office at Aerocity, New Delhi, on a specified date and time. The Court mandated that the concerned GST officer render all necessary assistance to enable the Petitioner to upload the PMT-03 forms, and that the portal functionality be restored or enabled within one week. This approach balanced the need for judicial oversight with the administrative nature of the grievance, ensuring that the Petitioner's rights were protected without overstepping into executive functions. Application of Law to Facts and Treatment of Competing Arguments The Petitioner's argument focused on the practical impediment to exercising the statutory option of submitting an undertaking, emphasizing the non-functioning portal and lack of departmental response. The Respondent's position relied on the existence of a clear procedural mechanism, implying that the Petitioner's difficulties were either technical or procedural in nature. The Court's reasoning acknowledged the Respondent's procedural framework but found that the framework was ineffective in practice for the Petitioner. The Court's directive for personal assistance and enabling the portal was a pragmatic solution respecting both parties' positions. 3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The Court held:
Core principles established include:
Final determinations on each issue were that the Petitioner's grievance about the non-functioning portal was well-founded; the prescribed procedure was inadequate in practice; and the GST authorities were directed to facilitate the Petitioner's submission of the undertaking within a stipulated timeframe, thereby safeguarding the Petitioner's rights under the GST laws.
|
