TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact that Export General Manifest for the shipping bills have been closed by the computer system, it is not possible to refund the IGST amount to the petitioner. The petitioner cannot be made helpless, just because the computer system does not enable them to refund the IGST amount. Being an undisputed fact that IGST refund is payable to the petitioner, the petitioner is absolutely entitled to the IGST refund from the respondents. The respondents ought to have refunded the IGST amount for the aforementioned shipping bills to the petitioner - the respondents are directed to refund the undisputed IGST amount payable to the petitioner for the below mentioned Shipping Bill - petition allowed. - W.P.(MD).No.24793 of 2018 And W.M.P.(MD)No.22481 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 2-4-2019 - Mr. Justice Abdul Quddhose For the Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Jayaraj For the Respondents : Mr.R.Aravindan ORDER The instant writ petition has been filed for a mandamus to direct the second respondent to settle and release the pending refund of IGST amount paid on the Shipping Bill Nos. 8676491/15.09.2017, 8898781/26.09.2017, 8930537/27.09.2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8129114 21.08.2017 166515 9 VSG/EXP/G ST/13 24.08.2017 8213317 24.08.2017 146614 10 VSG/EXP/G ST/14 24.08.2017 8213105 24.08.2017 177550 11 VSG/EXP/G ST/15 30.08.2017 8351457 31.08.2017 211768 12 VSG/EXP/G ST/16 31.08.2017 8383716 01.09.2017 152218 13 VSG/EXP/G ST/17 05.09.2017 8474843 06.09.2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame rate under both the columns(4) (6), it is evident that the petitioner has claimed drawback of customs component only for their exports. 6.It is also the case of the petitioner that under the Circular No. 22/2017-Customs, dated 30.06.2017, which deals with drawback claims for the transition period, clearly provides that While a transition period of three months has been allowed, the exporters shall have an option to claim only Customs portion of AIRs of duty drawback i.e., rates and caps given under column (6) and (7) respectively of the Schedule of AIRs of duty drawback and avail input tax credit, CGST or IGST or refund of IGST paid on exports. Furthermore, it is the case of the petitioner that CBEC vide Circular No.37/11/2018 GST in F.No.349/47/2017 GST, dated 15.03.2018 has clarified that a supplier availing drawback only with respect to basic custom duty shall be eligible for refund of GST. 7.According to the petitioner, they are entitled to claim refund of IGST paid on exports. It is also the case of the petitioner that Circular No.05/2018-Customs, dated 23.02.2018 provides alternate mechanism with officer interface for refun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made on 06.09.2018. 12.According to the petitioner, since the respondents have not refunded the IGST amount, they were constrained to file this instant writ petition. 13.A counter affidavit has also been filed by the respondents, wherein, they have admitted in Paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner has inadvertently made an error by wrongly declaring the Drawback Code as 680203A instead of 680203B. Further, they have admitted that the petitioner is entitled to refund of IGST amount, but could not be processed due to the fact that the IGST refund is processed and sanctioned by the computer generated system. Since the Export General Manifest(EGM) has already been closed for the aforementioned shipping bills by the computer system, the refund of IGST amount could not be made by the respondents to the petitioner. 14.It is also stated in the counter affidavit that amendment in the shipping bill is not possible, if EGM is closed and the shipping bill status has gone to history. They have also not disputed the circulars referred to by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner drew the attention of this court to a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Share Medical Care Vs. Union of India reported in 2007 (209) E.L.T 321 (S.C.) and referring to the said judgment, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Even if the applicant does not claim any benefit under a particular notification at initial stage, he is not debarred, prohibited or estopped from claiming such benefit at a later stage. 21.In the instant case also, according to him, Circular No. 8/2018, dated 23.03.2018, has not been repealed by the subsequent Circular No.37/2018, dated 09.10.2018. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that circular pertains to a different matter not pertaining to the issue on hand. Further, it is his case that Circular No.37/2018, dated 09.10.2018 cannot have retrospective effect. 22.Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly admitted that refund of IGST is payable for the shipping bills to the petitioner,but the same could not be processed only due to the fact that being a computer generated system, the system will not process the IGST refund, if the drawbac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein the officer can verify and satisfy himself of the actual payment of IGSt based on GST return information forwarded by GSTn. DG(Systems) shall open a physical interface for this purpose. 24.It is evident from the aforesaid Circular that the Government of India has provided an alternate mechanism in cases where, the exporters have committed errors in the shipping bills filed by them before the Customs Authority. 25.The case on hand will clearly indicate that only due to inadvertence, the drawback code in the shipping bill was wrongly mentioned as 680203A instead of 680203B. Further, it is undisputed by the respondents as seen from Paragraph No. 11 of the counter affidavit filed by them that IGST refund is payable for the aforementioned shipping bills to the petitioner. But only due to the fact that Export General Manifest for the shipping bills have been closed by the computer system, it is not possible to refund the IGST amount to the petitioner. The petitioner cannot be made helpless, just because the computer system does not enable them to refund the IGST amount. Being an undisputed fact that IGST refund is payable to the petitioner, the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
