Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Patanjali Foods Ltd. (Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd.) – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. refund claims based on igst and constitutional challenges. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments hinge on past judgments concerning igst. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's directive to issue the refund. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Uchit N. Sheth for the petitioner and learned Advocate Ms. Hetvi Sancheti for the respondents.
3. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
5. Brief facts of the case are as under:
5.2 It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of clearance of the goods for home consumption, the petitioner company pays Customs duty and Integrated Goods and Services Tax on the total value of goods which is the Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF) value.
5.4 Thereafter, the petitioner deposited IGST on ocean freight on Imports for a period 01.04.2018 to 30.11.2018 to the tune of Rs. 40,30,715/- and vide order dated 21.02.2019 contended before the respondent that such deposit has been made under protest as the petitioner is not liable to pay GST on ocean freight relating to the CIF imports.
5.6 The refund application was duly ackno
Refund of IGST is mandated when earlier notifications were found unconstitutional, confirming unavailability of time-bar arguments.
The court emphasized the need for timely refund processing under GST laws, overturning unjust rejection based on procedural grounds.
The court affirmed that an unlawful tax collection obligates the government to refund with interest, reinforcing the principle of unjust enrichment and constitutional mandates under Article 265.
The court held that refund claims for IGST on ocean freight are valid if filed after notifications imposing the levy are struck down as unconstitutional.
Refund applications for taxes paid under a mistake of law are not bound by strict statutory limits when the underlying tax was invalid.
Interest is payable on a tax refund when the tax was collected unlawfully, dating from payment until refund, emphasizing equity and restitution principles.
The court ruled that the denial of a tax refund on grounds of limitation was wrong, emphasizing the principle of unjust enrichment, and clarified that the time limit of two years for refund applicati....
Double taxation on the same transaction is impermissible, as established in the context of both C.I.F. and F.O.B. contracts.
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
