Back
RITU BAHRI, MANISHA BATRA
Silverline Chemicals – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ms. Ritu Bahri, J. (Oral)
M/s Silver line Chemicals-petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to sanction refund of the IGST paid with regard to the goods exported i.e. 'zero rated supplies', made vide shipping bill Nos.7229240 and 7451382 dated 08.07.2017 and 19.07.2017 respectively.
2. The petitioner is registered with the Ministry of Commerce and in this regard, certificate of Importer-Exporter Code (IEC) dated 29.08.2003 (Annexure P-1) has been issued by the Assistant Director General of Foreign Trade. The petitioner has also placed on record copy of the GST Registration Certificate (Annexure P-2) to show that the company is registered with the Goods and Service Tax Authorities. Copies of the shipping bills and air way bills have been attached as Annexure P-3. As per petitioner, the goods were exported to Iran and IGST with regard to those goods was paid. After the goods were exported, as per Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Section 16 of the IGST Act, the petitioner made an application for refund of IGST paid with regard to the export goods. Further, on the request/complaint made by the petitioner, a correction was mad
Refund of IGST on zero-rated supplies is permissible even when a higher drawback is claimed, provided the exporter meets statutory conditions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner is entitled to an IGST refund for zero-rated supply exports under the relevant provisions of the IGST Act and CGST Act, despite a....
Exporters are entitled to IGST refunds despite claiming higher duty drawback rates, reinforcing the principle of coherent refund applications.
The court established that transitional CENVAT credit can be carried forward into the GST regime and utilized for claiming refunds under the CGST Act, rejecting hyper-technical interpretations by aut....
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....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to interest at 7% on delayed IGST refund, as well as the verification of duty drawback/CENVAT credit availed by the petitioners.
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
