The Delhi High Court has held on the writ filed by the petitioner M/s Jian International, that the officers have no right to find a deficiency in GST refund application after 15 days as per time limit prescribed under Rule 90 of the CGST Rules,2017.
The writ petition had been filed seeking a direction to the respondent, Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax to grant refund of Rs.9,12,893/- claimed under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the month of August, 2019 as well as the grant of an interest in accordance with Section 56 of CGST Act.
The Petitioner stated that in accordance with Section 54(6) read with Rule 91 of CGST Rules, 2017, the proper officer is required to refund at least 90% of the refund claimed on account of zero-rated supply of goods or services or both made by registered persons within 7 days from the date of acknowledgment issued under Rule 90. The petitioner contended that despite the period of 15 days from the date of filing of the refund application has expired, the respondent has to date neither pointed out any deficiency/discrepancy in FORM GST RFD-03 nor it has issued any acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02.
The respondent authority admitted that there was leniency on their part in processing the petitioner’s application.
However, the respondent authority contended that a formal deficiency memo will have to be issued as certain documents though annexed with the writ petition had not been uploaded by the petitioner along with its refund application.
The High Court found that Rules 90 and 91 of the CGST Rules,2017 provide a complete code with regard to acknowledgment, scrutiny, and grant of refund. The said Rules also provide a strict timeline for carrying out the aforesaid activities.
The bench observed that Rules 90 of the CGST Rules states that within 15 days from the date of filing of the refund application, the respondent has to either point out discrepancy/deficiency in FORM GST RFD-03 or acknowledge the refund application in FORM GST RFD-02.
The two-judge bench of Justice Manmohan and Sanjeev Narula held that the respondent had lost the right to point out any deficiency, in the petitioner’s refund application, at this belated stage. Accordingly, the Court directed the respondent to pay to the petitioner the refund along with interest in accordance with law within two weeks.
READ ORDER:
***
[rainbow]Don’t miss the next GST Update / Article / Judicial pronouncement[/rainbow]
Subscribe to our newsletter from FREE to stay updated on GST Law
Resolve your GST queries from national level experts on GST free of cost.
TW Editorial Team comprises of team of experienced Chartered Accountants and Advocates devoted to spread the knowledge of GST amongst the various stakeholders.
