Schneider Electric INDIA PVT.LTD vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
“a. To issue order(s), directions, writ(s) in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Notification No.53/2018-CT dated 09.10.2018 (Vide Annexure-D) and Notification No.54/2018-CT dated 09.10.2018 (Vide Annexure-E) issued by the Respondent No. 3 to the extent it restricts the Petitioner for claiming rebate of IGST paid at the time of exports of products. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372 b. To issue order(s), directions, writ(s) in the nature of mandamus allowing the refund of IGST paid by the Petitioner.
c. To issues order(s), directions, writ(s) or any other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems it fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice.
d. issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.3 to allow the petitioner to amend the shipping bills and consider the exports undertaken by the petitioner as zero- rated supply undertaken under bond or letter of undertaking and in effect allow them to claim the refund of the unutilized input tax credit in terms section 16(3) (a) of the IGST act read with section 54 of the CGST act and rule 89 the CGST rules;
e. issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.3 to allow the petitioner to avail the recredit of the excess refund paid back after reducing the amount of refund granted in terms of the aforementioned prayer;
f. issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.3 to refrain from demanding any interest on the amount of refund already granted to Petitioner which has been subsequently reversed;
g. Alternatively, and without prejudice permit the Petitioner to avail credit on the basis of DRC-03, which has been submitted for making payment.” HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372
Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
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: HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372 "
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 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (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 – G dated 12.03.2021 issued by respondent No.3 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. (iii) Respondent authorities are directed to refund the amount, if any, payable to the petitioner 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 SV
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.