Abb INDIA 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- CTdated: 09.10.2018 and Notification No.54/2018-CT dated: 09.10.2018 issued by the Respondent No.3. 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 circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”
Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 3 to 6 and learned HCGP for respondent No.2 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372
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:
"
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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52372 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.
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) 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 List No.: 3
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.