9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he outset, Mr. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents points out that there is an error in the cause title of the present petition. He states that the present petition has been filed in the name of its Director 'Mr. Amit Goyal' instead of 'Kunal Autotech Pvt. Ltd.' 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the same has happened due to a typographical error. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denied by an order-in-original dated 25.11.2022 principally on the ground that the petitioner's turnover for the relevant period (May, 2022 to June, 2022) was less than the refund claimed and that the petitioner had availed an excess ITC amounting to Rs.1,86,14,376.6 during the Financial Year 2021-22. This was determined on the basis of a mismatch in the returns (GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B). The petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, there is no order staying the operation of the order-in-appeal dated 19.06.2023. We are unable to accept that the respondents can withhold the refund due to the petitioner on the ground as stated. 11. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to forthwith process the petitioner's claim for refund in compliance with the order-in-appeal dated 19.06.2023 along with applicable interest, in accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
