Netweb Technologies INDIA PVT LTD & Anr. vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

W.P.(C)/1532/2019HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01010871201915 February 2019Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN3 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rana. S. Biswas and Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma, AdvsFor Respondent: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr. Farman Ali, Mr. Akash Mohan and Mr. Kunal Bhargava, Advs. for R-1. Mr.Amit Bansal, Adv.for R-2 & 4

AI SummaryAllowed

Held

The Court held that Rule 97A of the CGST Rules, 2017, allows for manual filing of refund applications when there are technical deficiencies in the online system. The manual applications should be accepted and processed expeditiously.

Facts

The petitioners, who import computer components and supply finished goods, are aggrieved by the inaction of GST authorities in processing their refund claims for imports. Their online refund applications were not processed due to a system error stating 'GSTIN of the Supplier cannot be same as the GSTIN of the Refund Applicant'.

Key Issues

Whether the GST authorities can refuse to process refund claims due to technical system errors, and if manual filing is permissible under the GST Rules.

Sections Cited

Rule 97A, Rule 89, Rule 97

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1532/2019 & CM APPL. 7100/2019 NETWEB TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through : Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rana. S. Biswas and Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr. Farman Ali, Mr. Akash Mohan and Mr. Kunal Bhargava, Advs. for R-1. Mr.Amit Bansal, Adv.for R-2 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R %

15.02.

2019

Issue notice to the respondents.

Mr. Ravi Prakash, Central Government Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent no.

Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 4. 3. The petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents, especially the Assistant Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax (GST) in failing to process its refund claims for imports, in respect of GST RFD-01A refund applications filed for the period May, 2018 till date. The petitioner inter alia imports computer components and effects

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.