Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
B.P.COLABAWALLA, FIRDOSH P.POONIWALLA
Sundyne Pumps and Compressors India Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B. P. Colabawalla, J.
1. Rule. Respondent Nos.2 to 5 waive service. With the consent of the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 to Respondent No.5, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.
2. The present Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge two Orders-in-Appeal Nos. DC/APP- 1/P-488/22-23/27AAFCH1404FIZ2/HMD SEAL/ORDER/23-24/195 (for the period July 2021 to September 2021) and DC/APP-1/P-489/22-23/27AAFCH1404F1Z2/HMD SEAL/ORDER/23-24/196 (for the period October 2021 to December 2021) both dated 10.08.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, PUN-APP-E-001, the 4th Respondent herein, upholding the rejection of refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) relating to zero rated supplies (Exports) of goods and services.
3. The facts of the present Petition reflect that the Petitioner had filed two refund applications for the period July to September 2021 and October to December 2021 claiming refund of Rs.13,75,244 and Rs.25,88,634 respectively, of the unutilised ITC under Section 54(3) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”)/Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“MGST Act”) read with Rule 89 (
The Petitioner is considered an independent contractor not an agent, hence eligible for ITC refunds under GST provisions relating to zero-rated supplies.
The court emphasized that for services to qualify as 'export of services', authorities must accurately ascertain the petitioner's role as an intermediary, citing inadequate findings in previous rulin....
The court held that services provided do not constitute intermediary services, affirming that such services qualify as independent exports under the IGST Act.
The services provided were not intermediary services but on a principal-to-principal basis, justifying the refund of unutilized input tax credit as the denial was arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
The Court determined that the services provided by the petitioner do not constitute intermediary services under the IGST Act but qualify as export of services, leading to the quashing of the impugned....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for export services, if the tax incidence has not been passed on to the recipient, the service provider is entitled to a refund of GST, as per....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
