M/S Volvo Group INDIA Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “(a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, in the nature of Writ, quashing the impugned Order-in-Original No.RFD-25/2025-26/ED9 dated 21.07.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 enclosed at Annexure-A denying the refund of IGST amounting to Rs.3,11,25,210/-. (b) to declare and hold that Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, 2017 as amended from time-to-time is ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 and illegal and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of Constitution of India; (c) to declare and hold that Rule 96(10) of the KGST Rules, 2017 as amended by Notification (4-U/2017) No.FD 27 CSL 2017 dated 27.10.2018 is ultra vires Section 16(3)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017 and illegal and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of Constitution of India; (d) Pass such other Order or Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice.”
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53318
In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the order of this Court in the case of M/s Hikal Limited Vs. Union of India and others – W.P.No.15251/2020 dated 09.12.2025, in order to contend that the present petition deserves to be allowed and disposed of in terms of the said order.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.
As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s – W.P.No.15251/2020 dated 09.12.2025, the operative portion of which reads as under:
"
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and striking down of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Act and the judgments of the Kerala High Court and other High Courts including Bombay High Court in the petitioner’s own case HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53318 coupled with the fact that respondents themselves have omitted Rule 96(10) vide Notification dated 08.10.2024, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned Show Cause Notice and all further proceedings pursuant thereto deserves to be quashed.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned Show Cause Notice at Annexure – R dated 07.10.2020 issued by respondent No.5 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. (iii) Respondent authorities are directed to refund IGST amounting to Rs.75,55,123/- along with applicable interest back to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
The aforesaid order is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and consequently, the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the judgment of this Court in M/s Hikal Limited’s case supra.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53318 (i) The petition is allowed and disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court in the case of M/s Hikal Limited Vs. Union of India and others – W.P.No.15251/2020 dated 09.12.2025. (ii) The impugned Show Cause Notice at Annexure – J dated 08.07.2025 and impugned order – in – original dated 21.07.2025 issued by respondent and all further proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
(iii) Respondent authorities are directed to refund IGST amounting to Rs.3,11,25,210/- along with applicable interest back to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.