Vaishno Polymers Through Its Partner Mr. Ankit Bansal vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Another
Original PDF →Facts
The writ petitioner, Vaishno Polymers, approached the Delhi High Court due to the respondents' failure to disburse determined GST refunds. The Central GST Officer had already disbursed refunds for January, February, May, and June 2019. The State GST Authorities had issued a Payment Advice dated October 21, 2019. The petitioner sought the release of these determined refunds.
Held
The Court held that the respondents should ensure the release of all refunds determined as due and payable to the writ petitioner. The reasoning was based on the fact that the Central GST Officer had already disbursed refunds for specific months and the State GST Authorities had issued a Payment Advice. The Court directed the respondents to release these refunds within a period of four weeks, along with any applicable statutory interest. The Court also noted that if the petitioner was aggrieved by the quantification of the refund, it would be open to them to pursue appropriate remedies.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to release the determined GST refunds to the petitioner, considering the issuance of a Payment Advice by the State GST Authorities and disbursement by the Central GST Officer. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that despite the Central GST Officer having disbursed refunds for certain months and the State GST Authorities issuing a Payment Advice, the actual disbursement of the full determined refund was pending, necessitating judicial intervention. Respondents' contention: The respondents, represented by the Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and another, did not explicitly record any arguments against the release of the determined refunds in the judgment. However, their presence and the issuance of the Payment Advice suggest an acknowledgment of the refund process.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2024
The writ petitioner is constrained to approach this Court consequent to a failure on the part of the respondents to disburse the refunds which have been duly determined.
From the material placed on record, we find that the Juri ictional Central GST Officer has already disbursed the refunds for the months of January, February, May and June 2019. 3. Insofar as the State GST Authorities are concerned, we find on our record that a Payment Advice dated 21 October 2019 has already been issued.
In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to ensure that all refunds that have been determined as due and payable to the writ petitioner are released This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 02:20:30
within a period of four weeks along with such statutory interest as may be applicable.
In case the petitioner be aggrieved by the quantification of the refund, it shall be open to it to adopt appropriate remedies. YASHWANT VARMA, J. RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. SEPTEMBER 25, 2024/sk This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 02:20:30
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.