M/S Triune Projects Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of State GST And Vat Department Of Trade And Taxes Delhi
Facts
The Petitioner, M/s Triune Projects Private Limited, filed a writ petition seeking a refund. On March 28, 2025, the Delhi High Court directed the Respondent, Commissioner of State GST and VAT Department of Trade and Taxes Delhi, to issue the refund to the Petitioner within four weeks, along with statutory interest. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed an application seeking compliance with this order. The Respondent filed a status report stating there was a discrepancy in the Petitioner's filed returns. The Petitioner, in reply, admitted the mistake. The Court noted that the procedure for rectifying mistakes in returns was not brought to the attention of the Bench when the original order was passed.
Held
The Court acknowledged the Petitioner's application for compliance with the order dated March 28, 2025, which directed the issuance of a refund. The Respondent's stand was that a discrepancy in the Petitioner's returns prevented compliance, a mistake the Petitioner admitted. The Court observed that the procedure for rectifying such mistakes in returns was not considered when the original refund order was passed. Consequently, the Court decided to list the matter before the same Bench that issued the original order for further consideration on December 17, 2025. The Petitioner's willingness to file an amended manual return was noted and directed to be presented to the Bench.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Respondent is obligated to issue the refund as directed by the order dated March 28, 2025, despite alleged discrepancies in the Petitioner's returns, and if so, what procedure should be followed for rectification? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation of relevant GST provisions concerning refunds and return discrepancies). Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued for compliance with the prior court order directing the refund. They expressed willingness to file an amended manual return to rectify any admitted mistakes. Respondent's Arguments: The Respondent contended that there was a discrepancy in the returns filed by the Petitioner, which, according to their status report, was admitted by the Petitioner. This discrepancy was presented as a reason for not complying with the refund order.
Sections Cited
Section 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 12.12.2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 41655/2025 (seeking intervention) in W.P.(C) 14121/2024
This is an application filed by the Petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking compliance of the order dated 28th March, 2025. Vide the said order, refund was directed to be issued to the Petitioner in the following terms:
“5. Resultantly, the writ petition is answered in terms of Prayer (i) and stands disposed of. The Respondent is directed to ensure that the refund is given to the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from today alongwith statutory interest.” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scann
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.