Maschio Gaspardo INDIA Private Limited And Anr vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs And Ors

Held

The Court directed respondents 2 and 3 to dispose of the petitioners' applications in accordance with law and on their own merits within four weeks, after giving the petitioners a personal hearing and passing a reasoned order. The Court clarified that if respondents 2 and 3 were of the opinion that the GST Authorities were the appropriate authorities, they should transfer the applications to the GST Authorities. The GST Authorities, upon receipt, were also directed to dispose of the applications within four weeks from their receipt, after hearing the petitioners and passing a reasoned order. The Court explicitly stated that it had not decided the issue of which authority, respondents 2 and 3 or the GST Authorities, was the appropriate one. The petition was disposed of on these terms.

Facts

Maschio Gaspardo India Private Limited and another (the petitioners) filed shipping bills and applied for a refund. Despite multiple letters sent between January 2020 and April 2024 requesting the refund and interest, the competent authority had not processed these applications. Consequently, the petitioners filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking directions for the authority to dispose of their refund and interest applications within four weeks. The respondents' counsel stated that the applications would be disposed of within four weeks after a personal hearing and reasoned order, identifying the GST Authority as the correct authority for IGST refunds. The petitioners' counsel, however, relied on a circular dated 23 February 2018, asserting that respondents 2 and 3 were the appropriate authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether respondents 2 and 3 are the appropriate authorities to process and sanction the petitioners' refund and interest applications, as contended by the petitioners relying on a circular dated 23 February 2018? 2. Whether the GST Authority is the appropriate authority for sanctioning IGST refunds, as contended by the respondents? The petitioners argued that respondents 2 and 3 were the appropriate authorities based on a circular dated 23 February 2018. The respondents contended that the GST Authority is the correct authority to sanction IGST refunds. The Court was required to determine which authority had the jurisdiction to process the refund applications and whether the delay in processing warranted judicial intervention.