ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a Mandamus to direct the respondent to sanction a sum of Rs.24,72,018/- as refund on the exports made by the petitioner during July, 2017, September, 2017 and October, 2017. 2.It is the specific case of the petitioner that though the petitioner had correctly declared the details in the monthly returns in Form GSTR-1 regarding the exports made by the petitioner on payment of tax by debiting the input tax credit, a mistake was committed by the petitioner in GSTR-3B under Rule 61(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the outward supplies ie., exports would have qualified as a zero rated supply and therefore, the petitioner should have filled the details in Form GSTR-3B in column 3.1 (b). Instead, the petitioner by mistake has given the details of the export as outward taxable supply (other than zero rated, nil rated and exempted).

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that similar mistake was made by the petitioner for all the three months, as a result of which though the petitioner has exported goods on payment of tax, the refund of integrated tax on exports under the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and IGST Act, 2017 has been denied to the petitioner. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the circular issued by the C.B.I. & C., GST Policy Wing, in Circular No.45/19/2018-GST, dated

30.05.2018, wherein it has been clarified as under:-

“4.Application for refund of integrated tax paid on export of services and supplies made to a Special Economic Zone developer or a Special Economic Zone unit:-

4.1. It has been represented that while filing the return in FORM GSTR-3B for a given tax period, certain registered persons committed errors in declaring the export of services on payment of integrated tax or zero rated supplies made to a Special Economic Zone developer or a Special Economic Zone unit on payment of integrated tax. They have shown such supplies in the Table under column 3.1(a) instead of showing them in column 3.1(b) of FORM GSTR-3B whilst they have shown the correct details in Table 6A or 6B of FORM GSTR-1 for the relevant tax period and duly discharged their tax liabilities. Such registered persons are unable to file the refund application in FORM GST RFD-01A for refund of integrated tax paid on the export of services or on supplies made to a SEZ developer or a SEZ unit on the GST common portal because of an inbuilt validation check in the system which restricts the refund amount claimed (integrated tax/cess) to the amount of integrated tax/cessmentioned under column 3.1(b) of FORM GSTR-3B (zero rated supplies) filed for the corresponding tax period.

4.2 In this regard, it is clarified that for the tax periods commencing from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2018, such registered persons shall be allowed to file the refund application in FORM GST RFD-01A on the common portal subject to the condition that the amount of refund of integrated tax/cess claimed shall not be more than the aggregate amount of integrated tax/cess mentioned in the Table under columns 3.1(a), 3.1(b) and 3.1(c) of FORM GSTR-3B filed for the corresponding tax period.”

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the said circular has been issued in the context of supplies made to the SEZ and the supplies by SEZ, the clarification made therein would apply even for direct exports by a Unit in the domestic tariff area, like the petitioner.

6.Opposing the prayer, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that the refund would be granted subject to the petitioner giving the correct informations in the returns, namely GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. It is only the information, which match and invoices, which were uploaded, the refund would be sanctioned. In this connection, the learned Senior Standing Counsel has relied to Rule 96 of the CGST Rules, 2017.

7.It is further submitt