Sicpa INDIA Private Limited And Anr vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Held
The High Court ruled that there is no express prohibition in Sections 49(6), 54, and 54(3) of the CGST Act against claiming a refund of unutilized ITC upon business closure. It held that while Section 54(3) specifies certain refund circumstances, the statute does not permit retention of tax without legal authority, thus entitling the petitioners to the refund.
Facts
Petitioners, SICPA India Private Limited, sought a refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) of over ₹4.37 crores upon discontinuing their business. Their refund application was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner and upheld by the Appellate Authority, who reasoned that the CGST Act does not provide for such refunds on business closure.
Key Issues
The key issue was whether the refund of unutilized ITC under Section 49(6) of the CGST Act is limited only to the circumstances specified in Section 54(3), or if a registered company has a right to such a refund upon discontinuance of business.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 49(6), Section 54, Section 54(3), Section 112 (CGST Act); Article 226, Article 227 (Constitution of India)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
(Civil Extraordinary Jurisdiction) DATED : 10th June, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WP(C) No.54 of 2023
Petitioners : SICPA India Private Limited and Another
versus
Respondents : Union of India and Others
Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance
Ms. Ankit Kanodia and Mr. Passang Tshering Bhutia, Advocates for the Petitioners.
Ms. Sangita Pradhan, Deputy Solicitor General of India for the Respondents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
The Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) and Central Excise, Gangto
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Sikkim High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.