Transformative Learning Solutions Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner Mcie CGST Delhi East Commissionerate & Ors.

Held

The Court noted the statement made by the respondents' counsel that the GST Department would coordinate with other departments for the disbursal of the sanctioned refund and that the refund would be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of the order. The Court found that the grievance of the petitioner stood addressed by this undertaking. Therefore, no further orders were required to be passed in the petition. The principle derived is that an undertaking given by the revenue authorities to disburse a sanctioned refund within a stipulated time, when accepted by the Court, resolves the grievance and leads to the disposal of the petition.

Facts

The petitioner, Transformativ Learning Solutions Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking directions for the disbursement of a sanctioned GST refund. The petitioner had attempted to disburse the refund, but the funds were not received because the petitioner's bank account had been deactivated. Despite pursuing the respondents, the amount remained undisbursed, leading to the filing of the present petition. The respondents, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, MCIE CGST Delhi East Commissionerate & Ors., stated that they had obtained instructions and would coordinate with other departments for the disbursal of the refund within two weeks.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to disburse the sanctioned GST refund to the petitioner, considering the petitioner's bank account was deactivated and the funds were not received. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the sanctioned refund had not been disbursed due to the deactivation of its bank account, and despite their efforts, the amount remained outstanding, necessitating judicial intervention. Respondents' contention: The respondents, through their counsel, stated that they had received instructions and would coordinate with other departments to ensure the refund is disbursed to the petitioner within a specified timeframe. No specific legal provisions or precedents were cited by either party in the judgment.