M/S Kashvi Power And Steel PVT. LTD. vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court directed the Opposite Party-authority to reprocess the refund application of the Petitioner in light of the fresh circular dated 20th September 2021 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), GST Policy Wing, Ministry of Finance, Government of India. The authority was instructed to convey its decision to the Petitioner not later than 7th February 2022. The Court emphasized that any technical issues hindering the reprocessing should be resolved expeditiously to ensure compliance with the timeline. The rejection of the Petitioner's refund application was set aside. The Court also directed the concerned Opposite Parties to extend full cooperation to the officers of the Department for compliance. If any difficulty arises in complying with these directions, the parties are at liberty to approach the Court. The writ petition was disposed of in these terms.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s Kashvi Power & Steel Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack challenging the rejection of its GST refund application. The Court, in a previous order dated 25th November 2021 in a similar matter (W.P.(C) No.34402 of 2021, M/s B.S. Minerals v. State of Odisha and others), had directed the authorities to reprocess refund applications in light of a fresh circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on 20th September 2021. The present order reiterates and applies this direction to the Petitioner's case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's refund application should be reprocessed in light of the fresh circular dated 20th September 2021 issued by the CBIC? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner sought a direction for the reprocessing of its refund application, relying on the precedent set by this Court in W.P.(C) No.34402 of 2021, which mandated reprocessing based on the aforementioned circular. The Petitioner implicitly argued that the rejection of its refund was erroneous in light of the new circular. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Opposite Parties (Union of India and others) regarding the Petitioner's refund application. However, the Court's order implies that the revenue authorities were directed to comply with the reprocessing instruction.