Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited vs. Deputy / Assistant Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, filed two writ petitions challenging orders dated 21.01.2022 and consequential orders dated 19.03.2022 issued by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy. The refund applications for the years 2018-19 and 2019-20 were rejected on the grounds that they were filed beyond the relevant period, citing Section 54(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Circular No.157/13/2021-GST. The Petitioner sought quashing of these orders and a direction to process their refund applications on merits.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order dated 21.01.2022, which rejected the Petitioner's refund claim on the premise that the application was filed beyond the relevant period under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, was liable to be set aside. This decision was based on the submission by both parties that Circular No.157/13/2021-GST had been superseded by Notification No.13 of 2022 – Central Tax, dated 05.07.2022. This notification directed the exclusion of the period between 01.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for computing the limitation period for filing refund applications under Sections 54 and 55 of the Act. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Respondent to consider the refund applications in terms of Sections 54 and 55 of the Act, taking into account the superseding notification, and pass orders in accordance with law. The direction was specifically for the portion of the refund rejected on grounds of limitation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the rejection of the Petitioner's refund applications for the years 2018-19 and 2019-20, based on the time limit prescribed under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, and Circular No.157/13/2021-GST, is legally sustainable in light of subsequent government notifications? Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the impugned orders were arbitrary and illegal. They relied on the fact that the Circular No.157/13/2021-GST, which formed the basis for rejection, had been superseded by a subsequent Notification issued by the Government of India on 05.07.2022. Respondent's Contention: The Respondent relied on Section 54(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, and Circular No.157/13/2021-GST to reject the refund applications on the grounds of being filed beyond the limitation period. However, the Respondent conceded that the aforementioned Circular had been superseded by the Notification dated 05.07.2022.
Sections Cited
Section 54(1), Section 54, Section 55
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the impugned order dated 21.01.2022, whereby, the Petitioner's claim for refund was rejected on the premise that the application was filed beyond the relevant _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)Nos.13190 and 13191 of 2022 period under Section 54(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and reliance was sought to be placed on the Circular No.157/13/2021-GST dated 20.07.2021 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs which indicates that the time limit cannot be extended, despite pandemic.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent that the above Circular has been superseded vide Notification issued by the Government of India dated 05.07.2022, whereby, the time limit between 01.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is directed to be excluded for computing the period of limitation for filing refund application under Sections 54 and 55 of the Act.
In view of the same, the impugned order dated 21.01.2022 is liable to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside. The Respondent shall consider the request / application for refund in terms of Sections 54 and 55 of the Act taking into account the Notification No.13 of 2022 – Central Tax, dated 05.07.2022 and pass orders in accordance with law. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)Nos.13190 and 13191 of 2022
It is further submitted that insofar as W.P.(MD)No.13191 of 2022 is concerned, the portion of the request for refund has been extended and therefore, the above direction is only with reference to the portion which has been rejected on the ground of limitation.
With the above direction, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 14.10.2022 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No vji _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)Nos.13190 and 13191 of 2022 To 1. The Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy-I Division, No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy – 620 001. 2. The Senior Deputy General Manager, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Finance / Indirect Taxation and Bills, Trichy – 620 014 . _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)Nos.13190 and 13191 of 2022 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. vji W.P.(MD)Nos.13190 and 13191 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.9371 and 9372 of 2022 14.10.2022 _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.