1. Home

SGST High Court Cases

GST – Section 54 of CGST Act of 2017 - Returned goods, Refund of GST paid in excess, Issue of deficiency memo, Limitation – The value of goods returned by customers exceeded the outward supply - Since there was excess deposit of tax by the petitioner, on the date of filing of the final return a refund of the tax paid-in-excess was claimed - Dept rejected the refund application on the ground of limitation under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 - Whether the refund application filed by the petitioner was within the limitation period under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 – HELD - the original refund application was within the two-year limitation period from the relevant date, i.e., the date of filing of the final GST return on 20.09.2018. The subsequent application was in continuation of the original application and could not be treated as a new application for the purpose of limitation - the period of limitation stops running once the refund application is filed, even if the proper officer requires further documents or clarification - Further, the character or nature of the second application can in no way be said to be different from that of the original application, rather the same was part of the proceedings in continuation to the first application. Therefore, the claim of petitioner concern can in no way be said to be barred by limitation - the deficiency memo rejecting the refund application is quashed and respondents are directed to process and release the GST refund along with interest at the rate from the due date till the date of realization. The respondents were also directed to pay the costs of Rs.30,000 to the petitioner – the writ petition is allowed - Whether the opportunity of hearing was required to be provided to the petitioner before rejecting the refund application – HELD - as per Rule 92(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 no refund application shall be rejected without providing the applicant an opportunity of being heard. The respondents had admitted that no personal hearing was provided to the petitioner, which was in violation of the rules. This is sufficient ground to quash the impugned deficiency memo.
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

GST Video

GSTR 9 & 9C - Important Changes
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?