Neha Jaiswal vs. Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence, Kolkata, And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Neha Jaiswal, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the CGST/WBGST authority to refund an amount allegedly recovered forcibly through DRC-03 by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI), Kolkata Zonal Unit. The DGGI, represented by Mr. Banerjee, submitted that the petitioner must first make a formal refund application under Section 54 of the CGST Act before the concerned authority. The writ petition was filed in the High Court.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application under Section 54 of the CGST Act before the concerned authority within ten days from the date of the order. The Court directed that if such an application is filed within the stipulated time, it shall be considered for the refund within two weeks from the date of its receipt. Furthermore, the Court mandated that before making any decision on the refund, the petitioner or their authorized representative must be given an opportunity for a personal hearing and allowed to present any judicial decisions in their support. The Court did not decide on the merits of the refund claim itself but guided the petitioner on the procedural recourse.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for refund of the amount allegedly recovered forcibly through DRC-03 by the DGGI, without first filing a formal refund application under Section 54 of the CGST Act? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a direct order from the High Court for the refund of the amount, implying that the recovery was improper and thus a formal refund application might be circumvented. The petitioner's counsel appeared before the court. Revenue's Argument: The respondent DGGI contended that the petitioner must follow the statutory procedure for claiming a refund by making an application under Section 54 of the CGST Act before the appropriate authority. They relied on the provisions of the CGST Act for refund claims.
Sections Cited
Section 54
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
WPA 1446 OF 2024 06.02.2024
Sl no. 7
Neha Jaiswal. Ct no. 2
- Vs - P.M. Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Kolkata Zonal Unit Ors.
Mr. Debabrata Ghosh Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee,
… for the petitioners Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee Mr. Tapan Bhanja
… for the respondent DGGI
Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition petitioner has made prayer for relief of direction upon the CGST/WBGST authority concerned to refund the amount in question alleged to be forcibly recovered/collected through DRC-03 by the DGGI. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate representing the respondent authority concerned submits that for claiming the refund in question petitioner will have to make an application under Section 54 of the CGST Act before the authority concerned in accordance with law and in proper form. Considering such submission of Mr. Banerjee this writ petition being WPA 1446 of 2024 is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to make application under Section 54 of the CGST Act in
2 proper form before the authority concerned within ten days from date and if such application is made by the petitioner within the time stipulated herein the same shall be considered for refund in question within two weeks from the date of receipt of such application. It is needless to mention that before taking such decision on refund by the respondent authority concerned, petitioner or its authorised representatives shall be given an opportunity of personal hearing and shall be allowed to rely on any judicial decision by any Court.
(Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.