TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioners on 21.04.2021 challenging the rejection of refund claim shall have to be considered within the period of limitation - the matter is remanded back to the respondent No.2- Appellate Authority to decide the same on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners - Petition disposed off. - R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19196 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 27-7-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA MR ANAND NAINAWATI FOR THE PETITIONER MR NIKUNT K RAVAL FOR THE RESPONDENT ORDER PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Heard learned advocate Mr.Anand Nainawati for the petitioners and learned advocate Mr.Nikunt K. Raval for the respondents. 1. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order in Appeal dated 12th July, 2021 passed by the respondent No.2-Joint Commissioner (Appeals), CGST Appeal Commissionerate, Ahmedabad whereby, the Appeal filed by the petitioners for refund claimed under Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (the IGST Act) read with Section 54 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (the CGST Act) was rejected. 2.1. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.AA2410201029305. 2.9. The petitioners being aggrieved filed Appeal on 21.04.2021 before the respondent No.2 on the ground that the petitioners are eligible to file refund claim under Section 16 of the IGST Act read with Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the rules made there under. 2.10. After giving an opportunity of hearing on 08.06.2021 through virtual mode, the respondent No.2 rejected the Appeal filed by the petitioners vide order dated 12.07.2021 on the ground that there was a delay in filing the Appeal before the Appellate Authority. 2.11. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have filed this petition. 3.1. Learned advocate Mr.Anand Nainawati for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners filed the Appeal within the prescribed period of limitation under Section 107 of the CGST Act read with order passed by the Apex Court in case of Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020 with regard to congnizance for extension of limitation in view of the pandemic Covid-19. 3.2. It was submitted that Section 54 of the CGST Act provides for refund of tax paid on account of zero-rated supplies made and as the petitioners supplied DG sets to the SEZ unit, such supply wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon ble Supreme Court has been pleased to extend the limitation only qua filing of Appeals/proceedings and not towards the claim of refund such as sought to be filed before the respondent- Authority as per the Circular dated 20th July, 2021 issued on behalf of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes. 5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioners filed the Appeal before the Appellate Authority on 21.04.2021 with a delay. The petitioners received the order rejecting the refund claim on 20.11.2020 and therefore the petitioners ought to have filed the Appeal within three months by 19th February, 2021. The Appellate Authority could have condoned the delay of further one month i.e. up to 19th March, 2021. The Appellate Authority refused to condone the delay beyond 19th March, 2021 as per the provisions of Section 107(4) of the CGST Act, which reads as under : 107(4). The Appellate Authority may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of three months or six months, as the case may be, allow it to be presented within a further period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allow the present application by restoring the order dated 23.03.2020 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) NO. 3 of 2020 ; and ii. allow the present application by restoring the order dated 27.04.2021 passed by this Hon'ble Court in M.A. no. 665 of 2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) NO. 3 of 2020; and iii. pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. 5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel and the impact of the surge of the virus on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the prevailing conditions, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the M.A. No.21 of 2022 with the following directions: I.The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi judicial proceedings. II. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become avail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
