TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HAT:- Reliance placed in the case of M/S AMIT COTTON INDUSTRIES THROUGH PARTNER, VELJIBHAI VIRJIBHAI RANIPA VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [ 2019 (7) TMI 472 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] where it was held that respondents are directed to immediately sanction the refund of the IGST paid in regard to the goods exported, i.e. 'zero rated supplies', with 7% simple interest from the date of the shipping bills till the date of actual refund. The respondents are directed to process the petitioner s claim for refund along with applicable interest in accordance with law in light of the aforesaid decision - petition disposed off. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN For the Petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Respondent Authorities to grant refund of IGST, paid in respect of goods exported by the Petitioner during the Transitional Period pertaining to which duty drawback rate was higher in Column A than in B, after deducting differential amount of duty drawback, i.e. grant refund of Rs. 63,039/- [i.e. Rs. 1,07,551 (Rs. 57,960 Rs. 13,444)], along with appropriate interest on such refund from the date of the shipping bill till the date of actual refund; 2. The petitioner is a merchant exporter and is engaged in the business of exporting goods out of India. 3. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved, essentially, by denial of refund of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (hereafter IGST ) paid by the petitioner on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l cases, the drawback referred to in columns A and B are identical. The same clearly establish that no part of the indirect taxes (other than customs duty) were covered under the rates of the duty drawback. It is apparent where two rates are identical, the same only neutralize the part of the customs duty and would not subsume drawback in respect of other indirect taxes. 7. Concededly, the controversy involved in the present case is covered by the decision of this Court in TMA International Pvt. Ltd. Ors. v. Union of India: Neutral Citation No. 2021:DHC:1150-DB. 8. The learned counsel has also referred to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India: 2020 (12) TMI 1116 where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tually paid. 9. The Special Leave Petition preferred by the respondents against the said decision was rejected as the Supreme Court found no error in the finding of the Gujarat High Court [Order dated 30.07.2021 in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 7095/2021]. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the decision of this Court in M/s Kishan Lal Kuria Mal International v. Union of India Ors. Neutral Citation No. 2022:DHC:4086-DB and other connected matters. She points out that the petitioners in that case were also granted further relief of the differential amount between the IGST paid and the duty drawback in cases where the exporters had availed a higher duty drawback for the transition period. She subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shipping bills till the date of actual refund. (emphasis supplied) 7. Even a Special Leave Petition filed against the said judgment titled Principal Commissioner of Customs Ors. v. M/s Amit Cotton Industries, SLP (C) Diary No. 5502/2021 has already been dismissed by the Supreme Court of India on 22nd March, 2021. 8. Since the facts in the present cases are pari materia to the case in M/s Amit Cotton Industries (supra), the present writ petitions are allowed directing the Respondent authorities to grant refund of IGST paid on the goods exported by the Petitioners during the transitional period, after deducting the differential amount of duty drawback, if the said differential amount has not already been returned by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
