2026-VIL-381-BOM

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Rejection of refund of IGST on zero-rated supply, limitation for appeal, condonation of delay - Refund application for IGST paid on zero-rated supplies to a SEZ unit. The refund application was rejected without issuing a deficiency memo or providing a hearing, as required under Rule 92 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The petitioner later filed an appeal against the rejection order, but it was dismissed as time-barred - Whether the original order rejecting the refund application is valid and the delay in filing the appeal be condoned – HELD - The original order rejecting the refund application is void ab initio and non-est in law, as it was passed without complying with the mandatory requirements of Rule 92 of the CGST Rules, which requires the issuance of a deficiency memo and an opportunity of hearing before rejecting the refund application. The Department had subsequently entertained the petitioner's fresh refund application and issued a deficiency memo, which was not taken to its logical conclusion - In the peculiar facts of the case, where the initial rejection order was void and the petitioner was actively pursuing its rights, the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, especially considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic during the relevant period. The designated officer is directed to decide the petitioner's refund application in accordance with the law, without being influenced by the earlier rejection order or the order dismissing the appeal - The petitions are disposed of

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page