Focus Mall vs. The Union Of INDIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL THUR AY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 24TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4133 OF 2019(N) PETITIONER: FOCUS MALL 17/40,D-20,RAJAJI ROAD JUNCTION,KASABA KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673004,REP-BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MANOJ DIVAKAR. BY ADVS. SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR SRI.M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE UNION OF INDIA REP- BYTHE SECRETARY TO MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,NEW DELHI-110001. 2 THE CHAIRMAN,GST COUNCIL, OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN,JANAPATH, CANNAUGHT PALACE,NEW DELHI-110001. 3 THECHIEF COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER KERALA ZONE,CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. 4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE URBAN DIVISION,C.R.BUILDINGS, MANANCHIRA,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673001. R1-2 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA R3-4 BY SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.4133 OF 2019(N) 2 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of petitioner in the present case is for refund of the excess tax paid by the petitioner for the assessment year 2017-2018 approximately Rs.15 lakhs. The only impediment for not considering the request of the petitioner was on account of non-filing of the return of the assessment year 2017-2018, which was filed belatedly. The mistake was not willful, but owing to the defect in the online portal. The learned counsel for the GST submits that they would not averse in refunding the amount in view of the subsequent even that the petitioner has handed over the copy of the return filed for the assessment year 2017-2018. In view of the aforementioned situation and as well as the submission of the respective counsel, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 3rd and 4th respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for refund of excess tax as the terms

WP(C).No.4133 OF 2019(N) 3 for the period aforementioned have already been filed. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of one month. AMIT RAWAL nak JUDGE

WP(C).No.4133 OF 2019(N) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE DISSOLUTION DEED ENTERED UPON BETWEEN THE PARTNERS DATED 01.04.2018 EXHIBIT P2OF PAYMENT RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE TAX PAID FOR THE MONTH APRIL 2017 EXHIBIT P3OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TAX DEPARTMENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEFICIENCY MEMO RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19.06.2018 EXHIBIT P5OF REPLY GIVEN DATED 27.10.2018 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6OF UNDERTAKINGS GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27.10.2018. EXHIBIT P7OF LETTER DATED 23.01.2019 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT'S OFFICE. EXHIBIT P8OF LETTER RECEIVED THROUGH E- MAIL TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT'S OFFICE. //// P.A TO JUDGE