Vodafone Idea Limited vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

W.P.(C)/15795/2022HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01080948202225 November 2022Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU5 pages

For Petitioner: Ms Charanya Lakshmi Kumaran, Advocate with Mr Karan Sachdev, Mr Yogendra Aldak, Mr Agrim Arora, Ms Vaishali Goyal and Ms Bhavya Shukla, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Mr Siddharth Khatana, Senior Panel Counsel for R-1/UOI. Ms Sonu Bhatnagar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms Anushree Narain, Ms Venus Mahrotra and Ms Nishtha Mittal, Advocates for R-2 & 3

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The Court held that Section 18(3) of the CGST Act and Rule 41 of the CGST Rules, which deal with the transfer of unutilised Input Tax Credit upon business transfer, were not applicable to a claim for refund of tax paid on exported services. The Court found that the Scheme of Amalgamation, approved by the NCLT, clearly stipulated that all taxes payable by or refundable to the transferor company would be treated as the liability or refund of the transferee company.

Facts

The petitioner, Vodafone Idea Limited, sought a refund of IGST paid on exported services. The revenue authorities denied the refund, citing Section 18(3) of the CGST Act and Rule 41 of the CGST Rules, arguing that the provisions for transfer of unutilised ITC upon business transfer were not applicable. They also contended that the transferor company no longer existed.

Key Issues

Whether the provisions relating to transfer of unutilised ITC upon business transfer apply to a refund claim for IGST paid on exported services, and if the transferee company can claim such refund post-amalgamation.

Sections Cited

Section 18(3), Rule 41

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 15795/2022 VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED ......Petitioner Through: Ms Charanya Lakshmi Kumaran, Advocate with Mr Karan Sachdev, Mr Yogendra Aldak, Mr Agrim Arora, Ms Vaishali Goyal and Ms Bhavya Shukla, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ......Respondents Through: Mr Siddharth Khatana, Senior Panel Counsel for R-1/UOI. Ms Sonu Bhatnagar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms Anushree Narain, Ms Venus Mahrotra and Ms Nishtha Mittal, Advocates for R-2 & 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

25.11.

2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

The substantive prayer made in the writ petition reads as follows: - “(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, quashing the Order- in-Appeal No. 37/2022-23 dated 23.05.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner, CGST Appeals-II (enclosed at Annexure P1 of this Writ Petition) to the extent it is prejudicial to the Petitioner and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 to grant refu

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.