The petitioner will appear before the respondent on Monday, the 19th of July, 2021 at 10.30 a.m. without expecting any further notice in this regard.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Refund –– The petitioner challenged order dated 22.07.2020 rejecting its request for refund. The petitioner has made a claim for refund of Input Tax. The respondent issued a deficiency memo on 15.06.2020 calling for documents in support of the claim. A SCN dated 25.06.2020 proposing rejection of refund stating that there was a mismatch between the export value and the net ITC when compared to monthly returns. The petitioner submitted that two invoices relating to the month of March, 2020 had been inadvertantly omitted to be taken into account and this would account for mismatch. The impugned order has come to be passed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing, this point has not been putforth to the respondent. The court observed that the impugned order, is non-speaking and no reasons have been adduced for the rejection of the request.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the impugned order of rejection and directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent on 19th of July, 2021. The respondent shall pass an order of adjudication on the request of refund, within a period of four weeks.
The petitioner will appear before the respondent on Monday, the 19th of July, 2021 at 10.30 a.m. without expecting any further notice in this regard.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Refund –– The petitioner challenged order dated 22.07.2020 rejecting its request for refund. The petitioner has made a claim for refund of Input Tax. The respondent issued a deficiency memo on 15.06.2020 calling for documents in support of the claim. A SCN dated 25.06.2020 proposing rejection of refund stating that there was a mismatch between the export value and the net ITC when compared to monthly returns. The petitioner submitted that two invoices relating to the month of March, 2020 had been inadvertantly omitted to be taken into account and this would account for mismatch. The impugned order has come to be passed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing, this point has not been putforth to the respondent. The court observed that the impugned order, is non-speaking and no reasons have been adduced for the rejection of the request.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the impugned order of rejection and directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent on 19th of July, 2021. The respondent shall pass an order of adjudication on the request of refund, within a period of four weeks.