ORDER :

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the third respondent's orders dated 22.04.2022 [as per Annexures-K to K5 series in Form GST-RFD-05], and these orders are under Rule 92 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX RULES 2017 (for short, 'CGST 2017 Rules'). These impugned orders relate to the petitioner's claim for refund for the period between April 2021 and September 2021. The petitioner has also called in question the show cause notice dated 25.04.2022 [Annexure - L] issued under Section 74 of GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT 2017 (for short, 'GST Act') read with Rule 100(2) and 142 (1)(A) of the Goods and Services Rules 2017 (for short, 'GST Rules, 2017') and the Endorsement dated 13.06.2002 [Annexure - N] issued rejecting the petitioner's request for restoring the credit of IGST in a sum of Rs.52,44,57,242/-. The petitioner, as a consequential relief, has sought for refund of Rs.52,44,57,242/- or restoration of the credit for this amount in its Electronic Credit Ledger while also claiming interest in a sum of Rs.2,35,72,225/-.

2. The petitioner contends that it has affected exports until 29.04.2021 availing benefit under the Advanced Authorization Scheme 'without payment of integrated tax' with accumulated and unutilized ITC of RS.49,99,50,702/-. However, thereafter the petitioner, on advice, chose the option of exporting 'with payment of integrated tax' so that it could exhaust the accumulated and unutilized ITC, and because of this change, the petitioner, instead of filing application for refund of accumulated and unutilized ITC, claimed set off. The value of the petitioner's exports for the period between April 2021 and September 2021 is in a sum of RS.10,48,29,08,881/- with IGST liability of Rs.52,44,57,242/-, and because of accumulated and unutilized ITC [68,96,95,071], the petitioner was entitled to receive refund of Rs.52,44,57,242/-.

3. In the month of September 2021, the petitioner is allowed refund of only Rs.40,31,13,682/- and the petitioner's claim for refund Rs.12,13,43,560/- [Rs.52,44,57,242/- minus Rs.40,31,13,682/-] is blocked under Rule 96 (3) of the CGST Rules 2017. It is undisputed that the refund of this amount of Rs.12,13,43,560/- is blocked on the ground that the petitioner had availed benefit under the Notification in No. 79/2017- Customs dated 13.10.2017 alleging that the petitioner had availed double benefit in contravention of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules 2017.

4. The fourth respondent on 30.11.2021 has issued summons as part of investigation into the petitioner's claim for refund, and during these proceedings, the petitioner, on 10.12.2021, has repaid the amount of Rs.40,31,13,682/- received as refund. Further on 24.12.2021, the petitioner has also deposited a sum of Rs.2,35,72,225/- as interest. According to the petitioner, these repayments are voluntary, and these deposits are made in terms of Section 73 (5) of the Central GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT 2017.

5. The petitioner on 15.03.2022 has filed applications in FORM-GST-RFD-01 under Section 54 of CGST Act and Rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017 for the months of April to September 2021. The third respondent has issued notices for rejection of these applications, and the petitioner, who requested for personal hearing, has not filed objections to such notices because of certain technical glitch. The third respondent has rejected the petitioner's application by the impugned orders dated 22.04.2022 [Annexure - K Series] on the grounds that there is contravention of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules 2017 and that an investigation is underway. The petitioner has filed