SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 515

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J.
M/S. Asiatic Clinical Research Pvt. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Represented BY Its Under Secretary Ministry Of Finance Department - Respondent
Writ Petition No.13633/2020 (T-RES) C/W Writ Petition No.3384/2021, Writ Petition No.12555/2020
Decided on : 24-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI. Ravi Raghavan, Advocate For Smt. Sudeshna Banerjee, ADV.
For the Respondent: SRI Jeevan J. Neeralgi, ADV.

Headnote:

Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - Section 54 - Goods and Service Tax - Refund of IGST - Sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash the refund rejection orders - Petitioner submits that he is registered supplier under Goods and Service Tax Regime and is involved in export of service. It is further submitted that petitioner had paid IGST, but in light of his entitlement to claim refund on ground of zero-rated supply, petitioner had sought for refund of IGST paid by him under Section 54 of Act, 2017 - Petitioner submits that respondent -Authority had issued a show cause notice. Petitioner further submits that a provisional reply came to be made out as per Annexure-D seeking for further time to make a detailed reply - Held, It would be appropriate if petitioner is afforded an opportunity of personal hearing to substantiate detailed replies made, as per acknowledgements - Petitioner to be present for availing of opportunity of personal hearing, when such an opportunity is granted while disposing of application of petitioner as regards to the subject matter in W.P. W.P. and W.P., and a common date may be fixed in order to avoid conflicting orders to be passed as factual matrix is similar and question of consideration is also identical. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that he would avail of opportunity on date that is fixed for hearing and would co-operate for expeditious disposal of the matter – Writ Petitions disposed off.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash the refund rejection orders. Noticing that W.P.No.13633/2020 relates to rejection of refund order as regards October, 2018; W.P.No.12555/2020 relates to rejection of refund orders for the months of April, 2018 to September, 2018; W.P.No.3384/2021 relates to rejection of refund orders for the months of November, 2018 and December, 2018 and noticing that the rejection of refund orders relates to the same assessee and the similar contentions are advanced as regards to setting aside of the impugned orders, all the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed off by this common order.

2. Petitioner submits that he is the registered supplier under the Goods and Service Tax Regime and is involved in export of service. It is further submitted that the petitioner had paid IGST, but in light of his entitlement to claim refund on the ground of zero-rated supply, petitioner had sought for refund of the IGST paid by him under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

3. W.P.No.13633/2020:

Petitioner submits that respondent -Authority had issued a show cause notice at Annexure-C dated 30.10.2020 at 4.04 p.m. calling upon him to furnish reply within 15 days from the date of service of notice and the petitioner was directed to appear on 03.11.2020 at 4.03 p.m. Petitioner further submits that a provisional reply came to be made out as per Annexure-D seeking for further time to make a detailed reply. An application for adjournment dated 03.11.2020 was also filed requesting for personal hearing. It is further submitted that without waiting for the period of 15 days as was made available to make out his reply to the show cause notice, refund application of the petitioner came to be rejected on 12.11.2020.

4. W.P.No.12555/2020:

Petitioner submits that notices came to be issued on 08.09.2020 and 19.09.2020 calling upon the petitioner to appear on 09.09.2020 and 21.09.2020 respectively while offering a period of 15 days from the date of service of notice to furnish reply as regards to such notices. Petitioner submits that he has made out communications to the show cause notices issued and also sought for extension of time to file his response. However, without considering the request for adjournment as made out or waiting for the period of 15 days as was made available to make out his reply, impugned orders came to be passed rejecting the refund applications as per the orders at Annexures-A1 to A3 dated 18.09.2020 and orders dated 01.10.2020 at Annexures-A4 to A6.

5. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order at Annexure-A for the month of October, 2018 in W.P.No.13633/2020 and the orders at Annexures -A1 to A6 for the period from April, 2018 to September, 2018 in W.P.No.12555/2020 are in violation of the principles of natural justice as the entitlement of the petitioner to avail of the time period of 15 days to make out a detailed reply on merits and the request for personal hearing has been denied.

6. In light of the admitted position that the orders have been passed within a period of 15 days contrary to such period being made available to the petitioner and that request for adjournment has not been considered by the authorities, the orders of rejection of refund at Annexure-A in W.P.No.13633/2020 and Annexures -A1 to A6 in W.P.No.12555/2020 are set aside.

7. Respondent No.3 to afford the petitioner a fresh opportunity of hearing following the written representations of the petitioner. After affording such an opportunity for filing of fresh reply to the show cause notices issued and affording an opportunity of personal hearing, the orders to be passed by respondent No.3. Petitioner is directed to make out his detailed reply to the show cause notices referred to above within a period of two weeks from the date of release of this order. Respondent No.3 to fix a date of hearing and dispose off the matter within a period not later than one month thereafter.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top