The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner is entitled to claim refund of the balance in electronic cash ledger under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 54 of the CGST Act, and the mere existence of an alternative remedy is no bar for invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

(T. Vinod Kumar, J.)

1. This writ petition is filed primarily assailing the Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-GST-RRC-APP-091-20-21 (APP I), dated 29.12.2020, passed by the 4th respondent, whereby the said respondent had set aside the order passed by the 5th respondent in Appeal No. 03/2020-RR(GST)JC-D-D, dated 24.06.2020, denying the refund of excess amount lying to the credit of electronic cash ledger of the petitioner maintained under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'the CGST Act').

2. The petitioner contends that it is engaged in the business of trading of electronic goods over e-commerce platform by obtaining registration under the provisions of Goods and Service Tax Laws; that the petitioner procures electronic goods from various vendors based on forecasted demand of business and maintains huge inventory for the purpose of ensuring timely deliveries; that as a result of purchases effected by it, a very high balance of input tax credit of GST paid on its purchases is available in the electronic credit ledger; that on receiving orders through Electronic Commerce Operator (for short, 'ECO'), the sale is affected through ECO and goods are dispatched to customers; and that the tax liability is discharged by the petitioner by debiting the Electronic Credit Ledger.

3. The petitioner would further contend that upon effecting the sale through the e-platform of ECO, the consideration is received by the ECO from the customers and is remitted to the petitioner thereafter.

4. The ECO, before remitting the amount for the supply of goods effected through it to customers, retains a percentage of amount from and out of such consideration received and deposits such amount retained by the ECO with the Government in terms of Section 52 of the CGST Act as 'Collection of tax at source'; and that the such deposit of amount made by the ECO with the Government is allowed to be claimed as credit by the petitioner in the electronic cash ledger of the petitioner, on the basis of the statement filed by ECO in Form GSTR-8 in terms of Rule 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short, 'the CGST Rules').

5. The petitioner also contends that due to maintenance of huge inventory on account of purchases affected to meet the forecasted demand, the petitioner invariably has excess balance of ITC in its electronic credit ledger, which is utilized for discharge of GST liability, as and when sale of goods is effected through ECO, and therefore, the amount retained by the ECO and deposited with the Government under Section 52 of the CGST Act, as tax collected at source and reflected in petitioner's electronic cash ledger remains unutilized; that the said unutilized balance in the petitioner's electronic cash ledger can be claimed as refund in terms of Section 49(6) read with Section 54 of the CGST Act; and that the said balance amount in the electronic cash ledger is being refunded to the petitioner throughout India where it has operations, including in the State of Telangana.

6. It is further contended that the electronic cash ledger of the petitioner maintained on the GST portal is akin to e-wallet, where the e-valet holder keeps its money to be appropriated against a specific liability to be discharged and if the remains unutilized, it can claim credit back of the same to its account.

7. The petitioner contends that as the balance in electronic cash ledger was being refunded to it previously, even in respect of period October, 2018, the petitioner filed refund claim in Form CGST RFD-01A on 20.05.2019 for the period October, 2018, of the excess balance accumulated in electronic cash ledger of Rs. 1,17,29,989/- (IGST of Rs. 73,08,531/-, CGST of Rs. 22,10,729/- and SGST of Rs. 22,10,729/- in terms of Section 54 of the CGST Act read with Rule 89 of the CGST Rules; that the said refund application was adjudicated by the 5th respondent and a refund sanction order was passed granting refund of entire amount claimed as per refun