Comparex INDIA Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order, which dismissed the petitioner's refund application solely on the ground of limitation, had to be set aside. This decision was based on the notification dated 05.07.2022 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC). This notification explicitly excluded the period from 01.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for the computation of limitation for filing refund applications under Section 54 or Section 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the respondent's counsel could not contest the setting aside of the order. The Court ordered accordingly. The matter was remitted to the Special Commissioner to re-examine the refund application and pass a fresh order. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of this direction.
Facts
The petitioner, Comparex India Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 12.03.2022, passed by the Special Commissioner, Zone-11 (KCS), Department of Trade and Taxes, SGST, Government of NCT of Delhi. The petitioner's refund application was denied on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner argued that the period during which COVID-19 was prevalent in the city should be excluded from the limitation period, citing the Supreme Court's order in Suo Motu W.P.(C) No.3/2020. The respondents included the Union of India and various authorities from the Department of Trade and Taxes, SGST, Government of NCT of Delhi.
Key Issues
1. Whether the period during which COVID-19 was raging in the city should be excluded for the computation of limitation for filing refund applications under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in light of the Supreme Court's order in Suo Motu W.P.(C) No.3/2020? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner contended that the Special Commissioner was required to exclude the period affected by the COVID-19 pandemic when calculating the limitation period for their refund application, relying on the Supreme Court's order in Suo Motu W.P.(C) No.3/2020. Revenue's Contention: The respondent, through counsel Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, placed before the Court a notification dated 05.07.2022 issued by the CBIC, which excluded the period between 01.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 for the computation of limitation for filing refund applications under Section 54 or Section 55 of the Act. This implicitly acknowledged the petitioner's argument.
Sections Cited
Section 54, Section 55
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
W.P.(C)No.8154/2022 $~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Date of Decision: 19.09.2022 + W.P.(C) 8154/2022
COMPAREX INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Rajeev Sharma and Ms Anju, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
..... Respondents Through: Mr Dev P. Bhardwaj with Ms Anubha Bhardwaj and Mr Sarthak Anand, Advs. for R-1/UOI Mr Anurag Ojha, Adv. for R-2 & 3. Mr Anuj Aggarwal, ASC with Ms Aishwarya Sharma, Mr Sanyam Suri and Ms Ayushi Bansal, Advs. for R-4. CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
[Physical Court hearing/ Hybrid hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (Oral):
On the previous date i.e., 24.05.2022, we had recorded the following:
“2. The petitioner appears to have been denied refund on the ground that it was barred by limitation.
It is in this context that challenge has been laid to the order dated 12.03.2022, passed by respondent no.4 i.e., Special Commissioner, Zone-11 (KCS),
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.
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.