BharatTaxGST

M/S. Cargotec INDIA Private LTD. vs. State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/2391/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01003427202416 April 2024Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. RAVI RAGHAVAN & MEGHANALAL., ADVOCATESFor Respondent: SRI.HARISHA AGA FOR R1 TO R3 ; SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI FOR R4., ADVOCATES

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:15375 WP No. 2391 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 2391 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. CARGOTEC INDIA PRIVATE LTD., 163, BIPIN RESIDENCY, 1ST MAIN ROAD HMT LAYOUT NAGASEANDRA POST BENGALURU RURAL – 560 073 SRI JAGABANDHU GANGULY DEPUTY CONTROLLER - TAXATION INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI RAGHAVAN & MEGHANALAL., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE – 560 009 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT) 4.10 DGSTO 04, A BLOCK, 4TH FLOOR ROOM NO 402, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 047 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU NORTH WEST COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR BMTC BUS STAND COMPLEX. SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 051 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.HARISHA AGA FOR R1 TO R3 ; SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI FOR R4., ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:15375 WP No. 2391 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R3 OR R4 OR ANY OTHER OFFICER TO PROCESS THE REFUND CLAIM DATED 19/09/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER (ANNEXURE-A) AND TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME ON MERITS & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court my be pleased to:

a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, directing the Respondent No.3 or Respondent No.4 or any other officer to process the refund claim dated 19/09/2019 filed by the Petitioner (Annexure-A) and to adjudicate the same on merits.

b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, directing the Respondent No.3 or Respondent No.4 or any other officer to serve and make available the purported refund Sanction / Refund Rejection issued in Form RFD-06 in refund claim dated 19/09/2019 filed by the Petitioner (Annexure-A). NC: 2024:KHC:15375 c) Hold that the Petitioner is entitled to refund of Rs.10,42,497/-, along with applicable interest in terms of Section 56 of the CGST Act, 2017;

d) Issue any other appropriate writ, which this Hon’ble High Court deems appropriate; and e) Order for such further and other reliefs including costs, as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.

2.

The limited grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that despite having filing the refund claim as long back as on 19.09.2019 vide Annexure – A, the concerned respondent No.3 or 4 have not passed orders on the same and as such the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

3.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and the learned AGA for respondent No.3 submits that appropriate orders have already been passed as on today.

4.

Per contra learned counsel for the respondent No.4 invited my attention to the endorsement at Annexure – K dated 19.10.2023 to the effect that the claim of the petitioner has to be considered by respondent Nos.2 and 3 and not by respondent No.4. NC: 2024:KHC:15375

5.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the concerned respondent Nos.2 and 3 to pass appropriate orders on the refund claim of the petitioner dated 19.09.2019 at Annexure – A, if not already passed as on today, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is however made clear in the event, the concerned respondent Nos.2 and 3 have already passed appropriate order as on today, they are hereby directed to furnish a copy of the same to the petitioner to enable him to take recourse to such remedies as available in law.

6.

Subject to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition stands disposed of. JUDGE

DHA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 9

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.