2025-VIL-620-CAL

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Delay in filing appeal, Refund application, Duty to communicate deficiencies, and opportunity to rectify deficiencies – Respondent-assessee filed refund applications, but the Department uploaded deficiency memos indicating that the supporting documents were incomplete, without providing any details of the deficiencies. The respondent then filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the department to process the refund application, which was allowed by the Single Bench - Whether the direction issued by the Single Bench to the respondent to rectify the deficiencies and submit a fresh refund application was justified – HELD - The Department failed to communicate the specific deficiencies to the respondent, as required under the statutory provisions. The deficiencies were more procedural in nature, and the respondent should be given an opportunity to rectify them - the assessee was not made known of the defects which they are required to rectify. This is not only required for the purpose of compliance of the principles of natural justice but it is a statutory mandate in terms of sub-rule (3) of Rule 89 which mandates that where any deficiencies are noticed the proper officer was communicated to the application in Form GST RFD-03 through the common portal electronically, requiring him to file a fresh refund application after rectifying of such deficiencies - the learned Single Bench was fully justified in permitting the writ petitioner to cure the deficiencies and submit the refund application which has been directed to be processed - the direction issued by the learned Single Bench was just and proper and calls for no interference – The appeal is dismissed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page