M/S Pitambra Books PVT. LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

Held

The Court noted the respondent's submission that the petitioner's refund claim for the balance amount of Rs. 17,48,80,852/- had been sanctioned on July 22, 2020, and the sanction order had been issued electronically. The respondent also confirmed that the GSTN portal was developing functionality to accept refund applications spanning multiple financial years, expected by September 2020. The Court accepted these statements and held the respondents bound by them. However, the petitioner expressed grievance regarding the sanctioning order dated July 22, 2020. Since this order was appealable, the Court disposed of the writ petition and pending applications, granting liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. All rights and contentions of the parties were left open.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Pitambra Books Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking directions for the respondent authorities to accept its manual refund application dated February 14, 2020, and to disburse the refund claimed for the period November 2017 to March 2019. The petitioner contended that despite a previous High Court order staying paragraph 8 of Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST, the GSTN portal was not accepting refund applications spanning multiple financial years. The petitioner also stated that its manual application, filed after the previous order, had not been processed. The respondent indicated that the manual application was received on June 8, 2020, and that the petitioner had agreed to reduce its refund claim due to deficiencies. Subsequently, the respondent informed the Court that a refund of Rs. 17,48,80,852/- was sanctioned on July 22, 2020.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities are bound to accept and process the petitioner's manual refund application for the period November 2017 to March 2019, given that the GSTN portal was not accommodating applications spanning multiple financial years, and a previous High Court order had stayed paragraph 8 of Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST. Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the GSTN portal's inability to accept refund applications spread over two financial years, despite the High Court's order staying paragraph 8 of the relevant circular, necessitated the filing of a manual application. They further contended that their manual application, filed on February 14, 2020, and supplemented with clarifications, had not been processed. Respondent's contentions: The respondent stated that the manual application was received on June 8, 2020. They also indicated that the petitioner agreed to reduce its refund claim due to identified deficiencies and that a significant portion of the refund had been sanctioned on July 22, 2020. The respondent also informed the Court about the ongoing development of a GSTN portal functionality to allow clubbing of financial years for refund applications.