Failure to place so called communication of resolution comment in writ record due to inadvertence, cannot be a ground for review.
Section 54 of the CGST Act — Refund –- The review applications have been filed seeking review of the order dated 4th January, 2021 passed by this Court. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents of the writ petition to either open GSTN portal enabling the writ petitioner to file its application for refund in GST RFD-01 or to manually accept the application for refund of the petitioner pertaining to the periods 2017-18 and 2018-19 in respect of its claim for refund of unutilized ITC pertaining to compensation cess within a period of one month. The court observed that the counsel for review petitioner has not been able to point out any error of record committed by the writ court while passing the judgment under review. Further, the court observed that there is no error of record as such, but the review petitioner is seeking review by placing certain so-called communication of resolution comment. Therefore, bringing the so-called communication of resolution comment to the writ petitioner by filing the same in the review petition for the first time, cannot be a ground for review.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the review petitions.
Failure to place so called communication of resolution comment in writ record due to inadvertence, cannot be a ground for review.
Section 54 of the CGST Act — Refund –- The review applications have been filed seeking review of the order dated 4th January, 2021 passed by this Court. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents of the writ petition to either open GSTN portal enabling the writ petitioner to file its application for refund in GST RFD-01 or to manually accept the application for refund of the petitioner pertaining to the periods 2017-18 and 2018-19 in respect of its claim for refund of unutilized ITC pertaining to compensation cess within a period of one month. The court observed that the counsel for review petitioner has not been able to point out any error of record committed by the writ court while passing the judgment under review. Further, the court observed that there is no error of record as such, but the review petitioner is seeking review by placing certain so-called communication of resolution comment. Therefore, bringing the so-called communication of resolution comment to the writ petitioner by filing the same in the review petition for the first time, cannot be a ground for review.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the review petitions.