Refund — Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 — The petitioner exported Knitwear and Knitted Fabric, which amounts to zero-rated supply and in terms of Section 16(3) of the IGST Act, had applied for refund of ITC under Section 54 of the Act. The applications were made for the periods of July, August, September, October and November 2017. The petitioner's claim was rejected through five impugned orders, which are challenged by the petitioner. The petitioner predominantly stressed upon the ground that the rejection orders do not give reasons for inadmissibility of refund and therefore they are non speaking orders. The court observed that the respondent had rejected some of the proposals by stating that the ineligible goods or services are not directly used for making zero-rated supply. Apart from this, there is absolutely no other reasons adduced in the order. The Court further observed that the statutory authority are bound to consider the claim made and pass a reasoned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration.—Jay Jay Mills (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State Tax Officer, Special Circle-II, Kongu Nagar  28 TAXLOK.COM 024 (Madras)