Radhe Associates Through Partner Kirtibhai Dahyabhai Patel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's refund application was not belated. This finding was based on the joint submission of the parties regarding the applicability of Notification No. 13/2022-Central Tax dated July 5, 2022. This notification, issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, explicitly excludes the period from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022, for the computation of the limitation period for filing refund applications under Section 54 of the said Act. The Court noted that clause (iii) of the notification directly applied to the petitioner's case. The reasoning was that the statutory provision, as clarified by the government notification, extended the time limit for filing refund claims by excluding the specified period. Therefore, the rejection of the refund on the ground of being belated was incorrect. The ratio decidendi is that government notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, which exclude periods for computing limitation, must be given effect to, and refund applications filed within such excluded periods are to be treated as within time. The Court directed the competent authority to process the petitioner's refund claim in accordance with law, treating it as within time, and to grant the refund with statutory interest if found eligible, within 12 weeks.

Facts

The petitioner, Radhe Associates, sought a refund of CGST. The refund request was rejected by Respondent No. 2 on November 25, 2011, on the grounds that it was filed belatedly. The petitioner challenged this order before the High Court of Gujarat. During the proceedings, both parties agreed that a Notification dated July 5, 2022 (No. 13/2022-Central Tax), issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, was relevant. This notification excluded a specific period for the computation of the limitation period for filing refund applications. The petitioner's refund claim was filed within this excluded period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's refund application, filed under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was belated, thereby disentitling them to the refund, as held by Respondent No. 2. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that their refund application was not belated because the period from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022, should be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing refund applications, as per Notification No. 13/2022-Central Tax dated July 5, 2022, issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017. They contended that their application fell within this excluded period. Revenue's contention: The respondent (Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs) did not dispute the applicability of Notification No. 13/2022-Central Tax and conceded that the petitioner's claim was filed within the excluded period.