THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

WRIT PETITION No.11041 of 2024

ORDER

Heard Mr. T. Suryanarayana, learned Senior Counsel

representing Ms. K. Srilatha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.P. Kashyap, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Board

of Indirect Taxes and Customs for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. The petitioner is engaged in exporting of information technology and support services to customers outside India during the period from July, 2021 to February, 2022 (refund period). The petitioner claims to have made export of services under the “Zero- Rated Supply Mechanism” i.e., without charging output tax on exports, as provided in terms of Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the IGST Act”). The petitioner contends that in terms of Section 16(3) of the IGST Act read with Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the CGST Act”), it was eligible to claim refund of the unutilized input tax credit on supply of goods or services or

both having made zero-rated supply of services during that period. The petitioner further filed an application for refund of input tax credit vide Form GST-RFD-01, dated 10.05.2022 and claimed refund of Rs.2,97,88,701/- on the turnover of zero-rated supply of services amounting to Rs.3,65,90,54,093/-.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that it also furnished documentary evidence supporting its refund claim such as computation statement, input tax credit register, copies of export invoices and corresponding Foreign Inward Remittance Certificates (FIRCs) etc. A show cause notice was issued on 06.06.2022 in Form GST-RFD-08, by respondent No.1 asking the petitioner to show cause as to why refund claim should not be rejected as it had not furnished the documentary evidence regarding the country of incorporation of foreign customers and also certain reconciliation statements. The petitioner furnished the requisite details vide submission dated 21.06.2022. After considering the objections of the petitioner filed in response to the show cause notice, the Refund Sanctioning Authority passed an order on 27.06.2022 in Form GST-RFD-06 sanctioning a refund of Rs.2,92,67,277/-. The findings of the Refund Sanctioning Authority are extracted hereunder:

“In light of above details and the documents submitted by them electronically, and the other details available in the common portal, I find that:-

a) the refund claim for the same period has not been filed in the same category including any claim filed under ‘Any Other’ Category.

b) the refund claim has been filed within limitation of time, as provided under Acts, c) They filed all the due returns and no dues are pending for recovery from the them d) As provided under Section 54 (8), notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (5), the refundable amount shall, instead of being credited to the Fund, be paid to the applicant, if such amount is relatable to refund of tax paid on export of goods or services or both or on inputs or input services used in making such exports. Accordingly, the provisions of unjust enrichment are not applicable to present refund application in terms of the provisions of section 54(8) of the CGST Act mentioned above.

e) In terms of sub-rule (3) of rule 89 of CGST Rules, where the application relates to refund of input tax credit, the electronic credit ledger shall be debited by the applicant by an amount equal to the refund so claimed. Further, the Application Reference Number (ARN) will be generated only after the applicant has completed the process of filing the refund application in FORM GST RFD-01, and has completed uploading of all the supporting documents/undertaking/statements/invoices and, where required, the amount has been debited from the electronic credit/cash ledger. Accordingly, the refund amount claimed has been found debited from the electronic credit ledger.

f) They have not claimed the