TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of tax as the petitioner is entitled for refund of input tax borne on various input / input services utilised at its Duty Free Shop located inside the Airports. Therefore, there is no useful purpose in directing the third and fourth respondents Airport Authority to pay the tax for the past period and thereafter, it is for the petitioner to file refund claims in Form GST RFD-01A as the incidence of tax that has to be passed on the petitioner is refundable to the petitioner. Since the issue is revenue neutral, there are no merits in directing the third and fourth respondents to charge the GST on the petitioner for the period between July 2019 and March 2021 and to remit the same as whatever tax is payable and chargeable and the incidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner had filed similar Writ Petitions before the Kerala High Court and before the Madurai Bench of this Court. These Writ Petitions were predicated on the ground that since the petitioner's shop was located within the Chennai International Airport, Chennai, no tax was payable and therefore, the third and fourth respondents were not required to collect Goods and Service Tax (GST) for renting immovable property namely, Arrival and Departure Duty Free Shops from the petitioner. 3. The Madurai High Court has recently disposed the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner vide its order dated 11.03.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.2129 of 2018. The operative portion of this order reads as under:- 5. I am of the view that the very same approach ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 which has been granted for the aforesaid period. 5. It is submitted that since the petitioner had earlier obtained a stay order from Madurai Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.2129 of 2018, same order was also passed by this Court on 23.02.2018 in this Writ Petition. Under these circumstances, it appears that the third and fourth respondents proceeded to pay an amount of ₹ 18,68,95,333.19/- as tax directly to the Government of India without collecting it from the petitioner. Fr.Xavier, the learned Senior Counsel for the third and fourth respondents also confirmed the same. It is submitted that this amount may be directed to be refunded back to the third and fourth respondents for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er may be passed in terms of the decision of the Madurai Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.2129 of 2018. 8. This Writ Petition is contested by the learned counsel for the first respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner has no locus standi in as much as the petitioner is not responsible for payment of GST for renting of the shops from the third and fourth respondents and therefore, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. It is therefore submitted that third and fourth respondents the Airport Authority of India are liable to pay tax. If the petitioner is entitled for refund of such tax, it is for the petitioner to file appropriate refund claims under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, the Integrated Goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng no implication on over all collection of tax as the petitioner is entitled for refund of input tax borne on various input / input services utilised at its Duty Free Shop located inside the Airports. Therefore, there is no useful purpose in directing the third and fourth respondents Airport Authority to pay the tax for the past period and thereafter, it is for the petitioner to file refund claims in Form GST RFD-01A as the incidence of tax that has to be passed on the petitioner is refundable to the petitioner. 14. Since the issue is revenue neutral, I also do not find any merits in directing the third and fourth respondents to charge the GST on the petitioner for the period between July 2019 and March 2021 and to remit the same as w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
