Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Ankush Auto Deals - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of DGST - Respondent
W.P.(C) 12233 of 2021
Decided On : 28-10-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks refund of taxes. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner cites relevant legal provisions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court accepts respondents' undertaking. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.38294/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.12233/2021
1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. By way of the present petition, the Petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to issue refund of Rs.25,29,944/- (SGST Rs.12,64,972/- +CGST Rs.12,64,972/-) as well as to grant interest on the refund amount from the date immediately after the expiry of sixty days from the date of receipt of application in FORM RFD-01 till the date of refund and grant exemplary damages to petitioner as the respondents has acted in mala fide exercise of power in withholding the refund.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in terms of Section 54(7), it is incumbent upon the proper officer to issue the refund order within sixty days from the date of receipt of application of refund complete in all respects. He further submits that as per Section 56 of DGST/CGST Act any delay in processing/releasing the refund without any reasons would attract interest. He states that despite written requests/reminders dated 22nd September, 2021 & 05th October, 2021 no response has been received till date.
4. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order of this Court in WP(C) 4205/2020, Jian International Vs. Commissioner of Delhi Good and Services Tax, decided on 22nd July, 2020.
5. Issue notice. Mr.Naushad Ahmed Khan, learned ASC accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He, on instructions, undertakes to this Court that the petitioner's representations dated 22nd September, 2021 and 05th October, 2021 shall be disposed of in accordance with law within three weeks from today.
6. The undertaking given by learned counsel for the respondents is accepted by this Court and the respondents are held bound by the same.
7. In view thereof, the present writ petition is disposed of. List the matter for compliance on 10th January, 2022.
8. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
The court establishes that tax authorities must issue refund orders within sixty days as mandated by statute, failing which, interest and damages may apply.
Interest on tax refund is payable if not refunded within 60 days, calculated from the date of a complete application.
The court affirmed the right to interest under Section 56 of the CGST Act for delays in tax refunds and established that such delays, due to administrative inaction, should not detrimentally affect t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to interest as a compensation for being deprived of the use of the amounts due, even in cases where there is no statutory provision....
The court affirmed the mandatory obligation under Section 56 of the GST Act for authorities to grant interest on delayed refunds, emphasizing that such interest is compensatory and should not be deni....
The court emphasized the importance of prompt processing of refund applications under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions.
Interest on delayed refunds under the CGST Act is automatic and obligatory, reinforcing the beneficial nature of the legislation.
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
