Jian International vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax

Held

The Court held that Rules 90 and 91 of the CGST/DGST Rules provide a complete code for the processing of refund applications, including strict timelines. The Court found that the respondent had failed to issue an acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 or a deficiency memo in FORM GST RFD-03 within the stipulated fifteen days from the filing of the petitioner's refund application dated November 4, 2019. Consequently, the Court presumed the refund application to be complete in all respects. The Court ruled that allowing the respondent to issue a deficiency memo at this belated stage would enable them to process the application beyond statutory timelines, potentially impairing the petitioner's right to claim interest from the original filing date. The Court considered the respondent's prayer for a deficiency memo as a hyper-technical plea, given that all relevant documents were annexed with the writ petition and their authenticity was not disputed. Therefore, the Court concluded that the respondent had lost the right to point out any deficiency. The Court directed the respondent to pay the refund along with interest in accordance with law within two weeks. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Jian International, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent, Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax, to grant a refund of Rs. 9,12,893/- claimed under Section 54 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the month of August 2019, and also to grant interest under Section 56 of the DGST/CGST Act. The petitioner contended that the respondent failed to process the refund application within the stipulated seven-day period for 90% refund or the fifteen-day period for acknowledgment, as prescribed by Section 54(6) of the DGST Act and Rule 91(2) of the DGST Rules. The respondent admitted laxity and sought to issue a deficiency memo, claiming certain documents were not uploaded by the petitioner.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent, the Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax, is obligated to process the refund application of the petitioner, Jian International, within the timelines prescribed by Section 54(6) of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Rule 91(2) of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, for the tax period of August 2019? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the proper officer is required to refund at least 90% of the refund claimed for zero-rated supplies within seven days of acknowledgment, and within fifteen days of filing, either acknowledge the application or issue a deficiency memo. The petitioner stated that fifteen days had expired since filing the application on November 4, 2019, without any acknowledgment or deficiency memo, and that previous refund claims also required litigation to be processed. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent admitted laxity in processing the application and stated that a formal deficiency memo would need to be issued as certain documents, though annexed with the writ petition, had not been uploaded by the petitioner with its refund application.