Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2023 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 647 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURTRefund of amount recovered from the petitioner upon encashment of the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner to secure its interest qua the penalty - before the petitioner could have availed any remedy in appeal, that Bank Guarantee is disclosed to have been encashed on that date itself - HELD THAT:- Section 54 of IGST Act required the petitioner to move an application in the prescribed form and manner within two years from the refund being becoming due. By virtue of Section 54(7) of the Act, that claim ought to have been dealt with and disposed of within 60 days of its receipt. It is also not in dispute, by virtue of Section 56, any delay beyond statutory period of 60 days in dealing with the claim for refund, the revenue entailed the interest liability @ 6% from the end of period of 60 days. In the first place, there is no contrary opinion existing and perhaps none may arise as the language of the statute as it stands admits of no doubt. As to the filing of physical/offline application on 02.04.2019, there is no doubt raised by the revenue. Therefore, that application had been filed within the statutory period of two years from the date when the refund became due i.e., upon the first appeal order dated 09.03.2018 being passed. Therefore, the revenue authorities were obligated in law to deal with that application in terms of Section 54(7) of the Act, within a period of 60 days. Failing that, the revenue further became exposed to discharge interest liability on the delay in making the refund at the statutory rate from the end of 60 days from 02.06.2019. A writ of mandamus is issued to respondent no. 3 to dispose of the petitioner's refund claim application dated 02.04.2019 and to pay up the amount of refund claim together with statutory interest, within a period of three months from today - Petition allowed.
|