TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2022, which is sufficient to show that the petitioner is entitled to seek refund of the said amount paid by him. The petitioner would be entitled to refund of the said amount and the impugned order rejecting the refund deserves to be quashed and the respondents are to be directed to take necessary steps to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law - Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - WRIT PETITION No.10229 OF 2022 (T-RES) - - - Dated:- 13-10-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR PETITIONER (BY SRI. JEEVAN KUMAR.B.S., ADVOCATE) RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VANITA.K.R., ADVOCATE) ORDER In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:- 1. Pass an appropriate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is pointed out that the earlier Circular dated 31.03.2020 does not prohibit issuance of refund in favour of the petitioner and said position qua the Circular dated 31.03.2020 has been clarified by the Gauhati High Court in the case of BMG Informatics Pvt. Ltd., vs. The Union of India others WP(C)/3878/2021 dated 02.09.2021. It is therefore submitted that the impugned rejection order passed by the respondents deserve to be quashed and the respondents are to be directed to refund the GST paid by the petitioner by issuing necessary directions in this regard. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents while not disputing that during the pendency of the present petition, the Circular dated 06.07.2022 clarifying the earlier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry steps to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law bearing in mind the observations made in this order. 7. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned refund rejection order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the 3rd respondent in respect of the period January 2020 to March 2020 and April 2020 to June 2020 at Annexures-H and J respectively are hereby quashed. (iii) The respondents are directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for refund of the difference of GST amount paid by him under Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017, bearing in mind the observations made in this order as well as the Circular dated 06.07.2022 and the judgment of the Gauhati Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
