Back
2022 Supreme(Raj) 171
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
AKIL ABDUL HAMID KURESHI, SAMEER JAIN, JJ.
Triveni Electrodes, Through Its Partner Sh. Pooran Mal Agrawal S/o Late Sh. Daulat Ram Agrawal and Ors. - Appellant
versus
Union of India and Ors. - Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 2137 and 2138/2021
Decided on : 20-01-2022
For the Appellant :Pankaj Ghiya, Advocate
For the Respondent:R.D Rastogi, ASG, Akshay Bhardwaj, M.S. Singhvi, AG, Siddhanth Jain, Kinshuk Jain and Puneet Singhvi, Advocates
Headnote:
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 54 - Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Claimed for refund of the accumulated credit in the ledger account - Show cause notice and permitted - Petitioner had claimed for refund of accumulated credit in ledger account - Competent authority on such claim issued the impugned communication grounds proposed for rejecting the refund claim was that same was time barred - Before passing final order issued this show cause notice and permitted the petitioner to file reply within 15 days - Petitioner has also filed reply raising a contention that his refund claim is not subjected to the limitation period – Held, Court petitioner's challenge to the statutory provisions must come to an end stage, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the COVID related extensions would apply to time limit provisions contained in statutes for refund also neither pleading nor corresponding prayer for declaration to this effect – Court refuse to go into this question in present petition - petitioner's refund claim bearing in mind the reply of the petitioner, copy of which is produced as annexure A/4 - It would be open for the petitioner to raise additional grounds in support of the refund claim by filing reply within one week from today - Petitions are disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. Since the facts are similar in both these petitions, we may notice from Writ Petition No. 2137/2021.
2. The petitioner has challenged the vires of Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as ultra vires to the Constitution. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to set-aside a deficiency memo dated 04.12.2020 as annexure-A/3 to the writ petition.
3. The petitioner had claimed for refund of the accumulated credit in the ledger account. The competent authority on such claim issued the impugned communication dated 19.12.2020. One of the grounds proposed for rejecting the refund claim was that the same was time barred. The said authority however before passing final order issued this show cause notice and permitted the petitioner to file reply within 15 days. Accordingly, the petitioner has also filed the reply raising a contention that his refund claim is not subjected to the limitation period. Admittedly the assistant commissioner has not yet passed final order on the petitioner's refund claim.
4. At this stage, we may note one development, namely, that the Supreme Court in the Union of India and others v. VKC Footsteps India Pvt. Ltd. has upheld the vires of the statutory provisions under consideration. That being the situation, the petitioner's challenge to the statutory provisions must come to an end. However at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the COVID related extensions would apply to time limit provisions contained in the statutes for refund also. At the stage, there is neither pleading nor corresponding prayer for declaration to this effect. We therefore refuse to go into this question in the present petition.
5. In view of the facts and material on record, let the assistant commissioner decide the petitioner's refund claim bearing in mind the reply of the petitioner, copy of which is produced as annexure A/4. It would be open for the petitioner to raise additional grounds in support of the refund claim by filing reply within one week from today. If any such further reply is filed, the authority shall take into consideration the same also while taking final decision.
6. With these observations and directions, both the petitions are disposed of.
