Refund — Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017— The petitioner challenged the Second Deficiency Memo dated 23rd July, 2020 passed by respondent under Rule 90(3) of the Rules and for directions to the respondents to refund the excess tax of Rs.1,05,39,480/- inadvertently paid by the petitioner along with applicable interest with effect from 17th February, 2020 as well as for a declaration that Rule 90(3) of the Rules is ultra vires Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner submitted that the refund procedure in Rule 90(3) is arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires for the reason that issuance of a deficiency memo effectively results in rejection of the refund application without giving any opportunity of hearing to the applicant.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High issued notice returnable for 09.12.2020. — Insitel Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. [2020] 28 TAXLOK.COM 038 (Delhi)