For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

The Petitioner received a notice from the Office of the Commissioner, wherein it was stated that the authorities had noticed that Petitioner’s have made export under the payment of IGST with an intent to claim refund on duty paid, at the same time Petitioner availed of full exemption of IGST in the course of import of raw materials which have been imported for use in the manufacture of export goods. According to the authorities the Petitioner availed double benefits. While the action pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the Petitioner is pending, the Petitioner has filed this Petition seeking various declarations of law which is premature.

Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 – Refund -- The Petitioner sought to declare that Rule 96(10) is ultra vires of the Act and illegal and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Further, sought declarations that clarifications provided in paragraph 7 of Circular No. 45/19/2018-GST dated 30 May 2018, Para 5 of C.B.I. & C. Circular No. 59/33/2018-GST dated 4 September 2018, Para 3 of Circular No. 70/44/2018-GST dated 26 October 2018, Para 51 of Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST dated 18 November 2019 as being ultra vires Section 16(3)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017 and challenged the notice dated 30 June 2021, wherein it was stated that the Petitioner have made export under the payment of IGST with an intent to claim refund on duty paid, at the same time Petitioner availed of full exemption of IGST in the course of import of raw materials which have been imported for use in the manufacture of export goods. The court observed that enquiry is already under way. In such circumstances to give declarations of law as sought by the Petitioner would be not only academic but also premature. The counsel for the Petitioner sought to contend that the Respondent CGST Authorities have no power to issue instructions to the Customs Authorities not to sanction Refund and Customs Draw Back and submitted that Petitioner would file a separate Writ Petition and the other challenges raised by the Petitioner would be raised at the appropriate time.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Court disposed the petition, in the light the statement made by the Petitioner indicating the future course of action that Petitioner intends to take.

The Petitioner received a notice from the Office of the Commissioner, wherein it was stated that the authorities had noticed that Petitioner’s have made export under the payment of IGST with an intent to claim refund on duty paid, at the same time Petitioner availed of full exemption of IGST in the course of import of raw materials which have been imported for use in the manufacture of export goods. According to the authorities the Petitioner availed double benefits. While the action pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the Petitioner is pending, the Petitioner has filed this Petition seeking various declarations of law which is premature.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Court disposed the petition, in the light the statement made by the Petitioner indicating the future course of action that Petitioner intends to take.