in the case Sunlight Cable Industries Versus the Commissioner of Customs observed and has allowed the refund of IGST on zero-rated supply along with the 7% interest.
The bench comprising of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Jitendra Jain in the case observed and has directed the petitioner in the case was entitled to a refund of the IGST paid on the exports in question, as it being certain that the same did not being the case when the petitioner is availing of any double benefit, that is, the IGST refund and a higher duty drawback.
In the present case, the petitioner or assessee claimed an amount of Rs. 21,41,451 in respect of the zero-rated supply, which was denied by the said department.
The petitioner in the plea contended that the Petitioner had filed a GST Return in Form No.GSTR-1 for the month of August 2017, inadvertently mentioning an incorrect Invoice number and Port Code in respect of export transactions made. Further, the petitioner filed an amended or corrected return, amending particulars with respect to the Tax invoice and correcting the invoice number and the Port Code.
It has also been contended by the said petitioner that despite of all the complainants, there being no response from the Respondents. The Petitioner lodged a grievance in regard to the IGST refund with the Central Public Grievance Redress And Monitoring System, CPGRAMS. Thus, the grievance of the petitioner was acknowledged. An email was received by the petitioner wherein it is stated that the Petitioner’s grievance has been disposed of on the ground that the Petitioner had availed of a higher duty drawback on its exports under the said Export Invoice and corresponding Shipping Bill.
The petitioner in the plea also stated that the reasons for rejection were not correct. The court observed that the petitioner in the case again received the communication that the grievance had been closed.
It has also been contended by the petitioner in the plea that the petitioner’s exports were admittedly a zero-rated supply in terms of Section 16 of the IGST Act.The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that the petitioner in the case is being entitled to a refund of the IGST paid on the exports, as it is certain that this being not the case where the Petitioner is availing of any double benefit, that is, the IGST refund and a higher duty drawback. The counsel, Advocate Prathamesh Gargate appeared for the petitioner. The counsel, Advocate, Jitendra B. Mishra represented the respondent.
