Advance Computers And Mobiles INDIA PVT LTD & Anr. vs. The Commissioner Of Cenntral Goods And Service Tax And Anr.

W.P.(C)/2919/2023HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01066149202315 September 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL2 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Kumar & Mr. Naveen, AdvsFor Respondent: Ms. Anushree Narain SCC, Mr. Apurv Yadav and Mr. Naman Choula, Adv

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The High Court held that authorities cannot decline to pass a speaking order merely because no specific rule mandates it, emphasizing principles of fairness and natural justice. It directed the Commissioner to pass a speaking order on the petitioner's refund claim after granting an opportunity of hearing within one month.

Facts

The petitioner sought a refund of pre-GST tax amounts (IGST, CGST, SGST) carried forward into the GST regime, claiming entitlement despite having discharged tax liability in cash. Their refund application was rejected multiple times via a Deficiency Memo without a speaking order.

Key Issues

The key legal issue was whether tax authorities are obligated to pass a speaking order when rejecting a refund claim, even in the absence of an express statutory or rule-based mandate.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010661492023 + W.P.(C) 2919/2023 ADVANCE COMPUTERS AND MOBILES INDIA PVT LTD & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar & Mr. Naveen, Advs. versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Anushree Narain SCC, Mr. Apurv Yadav and Mr. Naman Choula, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R %

15.09.

2026

Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondent to process and issue a refund of ₹29,87,167/-, comprising ₹1,89,000/- towards Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST), ₹23,11,376/- towards Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST), and ₹4,86,791/- towards State Goods and Services Tax (SGST).

The refund in question pertains to the period before the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime was introduced. The Petitioner claims entitlement to carry forward the aforesaid amount upon the introduction of the GST regime.

The Petitioner states that, despite having discharged his tax liability in cash, his application seeking refund of the

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.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

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 Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.