M/S. Vansh International vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The writ-applicant, M/s. Vansh International, filed a writ-application before the Gujarat High Court seeking a mandamus to direct Respondent No. 5 to sanction its IGST refund claim, along with claims for duty drawback and other export entitlements. The petitioner's grievance was that Respondent No. 5 had failed to process and sanction these claims. The petitioner had received a deficiency memo from the Office of the Chief Commissioner, Customs, New Delhi, indicating system errors (SB005 & SB006) while processing the IGST refund and drawback. The petitioner claimed to have rectified these system errors and subsequently received no further deficiency notices, implying no outstanding issues preventing the refund.
Held
The Court held that Respondent No. 5 had failed to sanction the IGST refund claim, duty drawback, and other export entitlements of the petitioner. The Court noted that the petitioner had responded to the deficiency memo and rectified the identified system errors (SB005 & SB006). The absence of any further deficiency communication from the authorities indicated that there were no further impediments to processing the refund. The Court found no justification for withholding the eligible refund claim. The ratio decidendi is that once a taxpayer rectifies identified system errors and no further deficiencies are communicated, the revenue authorities are obligated to process and sanction the refund claims without undue delay. The Court directed Respondent No. 5 to sanction the IGST refund claim along with the claim of duty drawback and other export entitlements within a period of two weeks from the date of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether Respondent No. 5 has failed to discharge its statutory duty by not sanctioning the IGST refund claim, duty drawback, and other export entitlements of the petitioner, despite the petitioner having rectified the identified system errors (SB005 & SB006)? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that it had complied with the deficiency memo by rectifying the system errors SB005 and SB006. Since no further deficiency memo or letter was received, there was no valid reason for withholding the eligible refund claim. The petitioner relied on the fact that the error message displayed on the portal was 'N.A.', indicating no pending issues. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state respondents. However, the presence of the deficiency memo implies that the revenue authorities initially identified issues in processing the refund.
Sections Cited
Article 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)
By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:- 12(A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate order or direction for calling upon the refund application of the petitioner and after going through the same, respondent no.5 may be ordered to sanction the IGST refund claim along with claim of duty drawback and other export entitlements of the petitioner; (B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate order or direction directing the respondents, their servants, agents or representatives to adjudicate the refund application of IGST paid on export of the goods along with duty drawback and other export entitlements; C/SCA/967/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2022 (C) That pending Notice, admission and disposing of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondents, their sub-ordinates, agents or their representatives; (i) to forthwith sanction the refund claim of the petitioner with such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court; or (ii) to direct the respondents, their sub-ordinates, agents or their representatives to decide the pending refund applications forthwith without any further delay; (D) for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (C) above; (E) for costs of the petition/ application and orders thereon and; (F) for such further and other reliefs, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
We have heard Mr. Hardik Modh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant; Mr. Devang Vyas, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents nos.1 and 5 respectively and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned AGP appearing for the State respondents.
The issue raised in the present writ-application is in a very narrow compass. The grievance of the writ-applicant is that the respondent no.5 has failed to sanction the IGST refund claim alongwith the claim of duty drawback and other export entitlements of the writ-applicant.
Mr. Modh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ- applicant invited the attention of this Court at Page-78 of the paper-book. Page-78 is the deficiency memo issued by the Office of the Chief Commissioner, Customs, New Delhi. The same reads thus:- C/SCA/967/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2022 “769788/2021/CPGRAM-O/o CC-Cus-Zone-Delhi Reply in response to the complaint registered by Sh. Amit Maggu on the CPGRAM PORTAL vide Registration No.CBOEC/E/2021/00741, dated 10/02/2021. The grievance is regarding delay in sanction of GST Refund is pending since last 9 months. In this regard, it is informed by the ICD PPG Commissionerate that while processing the SB for IGST refund and Drawback claimed, SB005 & SB006 error is reflecting. The exporter is advised to get the above said system errors rectified so that IGST refund and Drawback scroll could be rolled out for their IEC. Further, Guide on IGST Refunds in ICES is attached herewith.”
It is the case of the writ-applicant that it immediately responded the deficiency memo and cleared the queries. Mr. Modh invited the attention of this Court to the averments made in Paragraph-5(B) of the memorandum of the writ-application. The same reads thus:- “B. The petitioner submits that the petitioner was informed vide letter No.769788/2021/CPGRAM-O/OCC-Cus-Zone-Delhi, that system error number SB005 and SB006 was reflecting while processing IGST refund and drawback claim. The petitioner complied/ rectified the above-mentioned system error SB005 and SB006. The petitioner thereafter did not receive any deficiency memo and/or letter showing any deficiency. Therefore, there is no point in withholding the eligible refund claim of the petitioner which can be seen from the error message “N.A.” displayed on the portal.”
In such circumstances referred to above, there is nothing further, which the writ-applicant has to do so as to seek the IGST refund.
This writ-application is disposed of with a direction to the C/SCA/967/2022 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2022 respondent no.5 to sanction the IGST refund claim alongwith the claim of duty drawback and other export entitlements within a period of two weeks from today. Direct service to the respondent no.5. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) A. B. VAGHELA
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.