Murtuza Foods Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

SCA/3076/2022HC GujaratGSTCNR GJHC24008174202221 September 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The Court held that the refund applications filed by the petitioners were to be treated as within time. This decision was based on the applicability of Notification No. 13/2022-Central Tax dated 5th July 2022, issued under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Clause (iii) of this notification specifically excludes the period from 1st March 2020 to 28th February 2022 for the computation of the period of limitation for filing refund applications under Section 54 of the Act. The Court noted that the petitioners' refund application, filed on 30.4.2021, fell within this excluded period. The respondents' counsel could not dispute this position, and an email from the competent authority confirmed the notification's application. Consequently, the Court directed the competent authority to process the refund claims in accordance with law, treating them as filed within time, and to grant the refund with statutory interest if the petitioners were otherwise eligible. The entire exercise was to be completed within 12 weeks from the receipt of the order.

Facts

The petitioners, Pooja Dehy Foods Pvt. Ltd. and others, filed writ petitions before the Gujarat High Court challenging orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), GST & Central Excise, Rajkot, and the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Bhavnagar. These orders denied the petitioners' refund claims for CGST. The primary reason cited by the authorities for rejecting the refund applications was that they were filed belatedly under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioners sought to set aside these orders, direct the sanction of their refund amounts, and claim statutory interest on the delayed refund.

Key Issues

1. Whether the refund applications filed by the petitioners were belatedly filed under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, thereby disentitling them to the refund? The petitioner argued that their refund applications were filed within the period excluded by Notification No. 13/2022-Central Tax dated 5th July 2022, issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act. This notification excluded the period from 1st March 2020 to 28th February 2022 for computing the period of limitation for filing refund applications under Section 54. The petitioner contended that their refund application, filed on 30.4.2021, fell within this excluded period. The respondent authorities, initially, had rejected the refund on the grounds of belated filing. However, during the court proceedings, the learned advocate for the respondents could not dispute the applicability of the aforementioned notification. The respondent authorities, through an email communication from the competent authority, confirmed the application of the notification to the petitioner's case, bringing the refund claim within the permissible time limits.

Sections Cited

Section 54, Section 168A, Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/SCA/90/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/09/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 90 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3076 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 226 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2815 of 2022 ========================================================== POOJA DEHY FOODS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR MALANI KANUBHAI KESHAVBHAI Versus UNION OF INDIA ========================================================== Appearance: HIREN J TRIVEDI(8808) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DHAVAL D VYAS(3225) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 21/09/2022

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. Hiren Trivedi for the petitioners and learned advocate Mr. Dhaval Vyas for the respondents, in all the petitions.

2.

The prayers in all these petitions are to set aside the order of the Commissioner (App

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.

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 Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.