TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n appeal has been extended till three months after the date on which the Tribunal is constituted. It is not necessary for this Court to examine the question whether appeals if and when preferred would be within time. Suffice it to state that the respondent has not secured any order which would, in any manner, stay the operation of the appellate orders passed by the Appellate Authority - Clearly, it is not open for the respondents to ignore the orders passed by the Appellate Authority merely on the ground that it has decided to appeal those orders. It would be debilitating to the rule of law, if the respondents are permitted to withhold implementation of the orders passed by the authority in this manner. Petition allowed. - HON' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner s case that on account of an inverted duty structure, he could not fully utilise his input tax credit and consequently, the same had accumulated to an aggregate figure of ₹74,02,337/- for the period in question (May, 2019 to December, 2019). 5. In view of the above, the petitioner filed separate applications (six in number) for claiming refund. The details of these applications are as under: Date of filing of refund claim Period Amount (in Rs.) 09.12.2020 May, 2019 8,89,402/- 23.12.2020 June, 2019 7,39,443/- 07.01.2021 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of six separate orders in original passed during the period 26.02.2021 to 25.05.2021. The principal reason for rejecting the petitioner s application was that he was not a registered person and therefore, was not entitled to refund under Section 54(3) of the Act. 9. The petitioner filed respective appeals against the orders in original and prevailed in those proceedings. By an order dated 20.09.2021, the appeals filed by the petitioner were allowed. The Appellate Authority accepted that the petitioner was carrying on his business from the relevant premises during the material time and had shifted its premises to Haryana thereafter. The Appellate Authority also found that there was no doubt as to the genuineness of the said claims ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which was allowed by an order dated 20.10.2021. 15. In terms of the orders passed by the Appellate Authority, the orders rejecting petitioner s application for refund have been set aside. The Appellate Authority has also directed restoration of the petitioner s GSTIN registration. 16. The record also indicates that the petitioner thereafter once again applied for the disbursement of refunds but the said applications were also not processed on the same pattern: first deficiency memos are issued and thereafter, the applications were rejected. 17. It is in the aforesaid context that the petitioner has filed the present petition. 18. The respondent has fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty. 23. Clearly, it is not open for the respondents to ignore the orders passed by the Appellate Authority merely on the ground that it has decided to appeal those orders. It would be debilitating to the rule of law, if the respondents are permitted to withhold implementation of the orders passed by the authority in this manner. 24. This Court has, in a similar matter (W.P.(C) 5462/2022 decided on 16.02.2023) directed the respondent to comply with the said order notwithstanding its decisions to file an appeal. 25. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. 26. The respondents are directed to forthwith process the petitioner s claim for refunds including interest. 27. It is clarified that this would not preclude th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
