Taboola INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

W.P.(C)/11488/2019HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01005565201919 November 2020Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA2 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. Rony O. John, Advocate with Mr. Piyush Swami and Mr. Arshdeep Singh, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC, UOI with Mr. Kushagra Kumar, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, GNCTD with Mr. Shikhar Sheel and Ms. Ayushi Bansal, Advocates for R-2 & R-3

AI SummaryRemanded

Held

The Court found the impugned order to be non-reasoned and potentially in violation of natural justice. Given that refunds for similar periods were allowed, the Court set aside the order.

Facts

The petitioner challenged an order rejecting their IGST refund application for October-November 2017. The petitioner argued the rejection violated natural justice and was non-reasoned. Similar refund applications for a later period were allowed.

Key Issues

Whether the refund rejection order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and lacked proper reasoning. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the IGST refund.

Sections Cited

None explicitly mentioned

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11488/2019 & CM APPL. 29229/2020 TABOOLA INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Rony O. John, Advocate with Mr. Piyush Swami and Mr. Arshdeep Singh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC, UOI with Mr. Kushagra Kumar, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, GNCTD with Mr. Shikhar Sheel and Ms. Ayushi Bansal, Advocates for R-2 & R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R %

19.11.

2020 The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order whereby the petitioner’s refund application of IGST for the period October to November 2017 has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no prior opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. He further states that the impugned order is a non-reasoned order, as it does not contain any reasons as to why the petitioner is no

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.