Anuj Gupta (Proprietor Of M/S Quality Auto Export) vs. Commissioner Of GST, Delhi North And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Anuj Gupta (Proprietor of M/s Quality Auto Export), filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents (Commissioner of GST, Delhi North and others) to refund an amount of ₹5,98,806/- with interest. The petitioner's refund claims, filed on three separate occasions, were rejected with deficiency memos stating that his GSTN registration was suspended and certain columns were missing in GSTR. The petitioner contended that his registration was not suspended and that he had rectified the deficiencies. The Court had previously directed the respondents to examine the GSTR 2A and address any technical errors, processing the refund within two weeks if no further issues were found.
Held
The Court noted the respondents' submission that the petitioner's GSTN registration was reflected as suspended due to a technical glitch, which was being addressed. Crucially, the respondents assured that this glitch would not prevent the processing of the petitioner's refund application. They also clarified that the initial non-processing was due to the petitioner submitting data in PDF format, a rectification that the petitioner's counsel confirmed had been made. Given these assurances, the Court found that the petitioner's grievance was addressed. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to re-apply if the refund was not processed as assured. The Court did not explicitly rule on the legality of the suspension or the technical glitch itself, focusing instead on the resolution of the refund processing issue.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's GSTN registration is indeed suspended, and if so, whether this is due to a technical glitch or a valid reason that prevents the processing of his refund claim? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of GST provisions related to registration status and refund processing). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that his GSTN registration has not been suspended and that the deficiency memos citing suspension are erroneous. He asserted that he had rectified any pointed-out deficiencies. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, stated that the petitioner's GSTN registration appeared suspended on the GST portal due to a technical glitch, which was being addressed. However, they clarified that this glitch should not impede the processing of the petitioner's application. They further submitted that the application was not processed initially because the data was submitted in PDF format instead of being incorporated into the portal.
Sections Cited
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2023
The petitioner has filed the present petition, praying that the respondents be directed to refund an amount of ₹5,98,806/- along with applicable interest to the petitioner.
The petitioner claims that his refund has been withheld on the erroneous assumption that his registration under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has been suspended.
The petitioner’s grievance is that he applied for refund on three separate occasions and on each occasion, a deficiency memo was generated, reflecting the reason that the GSTN registration is suspended and the columns are missing in GSTR. The petitioner states that the grounds for non-processing of its claim for refund are erroneous as his GSTN registration has not been suspended. It is also his case that he had rectified the 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 03/06/2026 at 09:23:47
deficiency pointed out.
On 13.01.2023, this Court had passed the following directions:
“10. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to examine whether the form GSTR 2A, as visible at the petitioner’s end, reflects all relevant details. If it does, it would be apparent that there is a technical error is in the respondents’ system.
If it is found that such a problem exists, the respondents are directed to address the said technical problem within a period of one week from today and, in any event, process the petitioner’s application for refund within a period of two weeks, on the basis of forms already filed. In the event the respondents cannot process the petitioner’s application for refund, the respondents shall indicate the same to the petitioner within the aforesaid period.”
Mr. Tripathi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, states that the petitioner’s GSTN registration is reflected as suspended on the GST portal on account of a technical glitch. The said glitch is being addressed. However, the glitch will not come in the way of the Department in processing the petitioner’s application. He submits that the petitioner’s application was not processed because he had submitted the data in a PDF form instead of incorporating it in the portal.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has since rectified that issue as well.
Mr. Tripathi submits that the petitioner’s application for refund would be processed as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within a period of sixty days from date.
In view of the above, the petitioner’s grievance is addressed.
The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
The petitioner is at liberty to apply in the event, his claim 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 03/06/2026 at 09:23:47
for refund is not processed as assured. VIBHU BAKHRU, J AMIT MAHAJAN, J FEBRUARY 16, 2023 “SS” 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 03/06/2026 at 09:23:47
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.