Big Bull Traders Company Private Limited And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Facts

The petitioners, Big Bull Traders Company Private Limited & Anr., filed a writ petition (WPA 8065 of 2021) and a connected application (CAN 1/2022) challenging an adjudication order and an order of the Appellate Authority concerning Electric Vehicles. The petitioners drew the court's attention to a Circular dated August 3, 2022, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (No. 179/11//2022-GST). They argued that the impugned orders were contrary to this Circular and that they were entitled to a refund of excess GST collected. The State GST authority acknowledged that while the State had not yet issued a similar circular, it intended to do so shortly and suggested remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to consider the refund claim in light of the Central Government's Circular.

Held

The Court held that both the writ petition and the connected application were to be disposed of by setting aside the impugned adjudication order and the appeal order. The matter was remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to pass a fresh order after taking into consideration the benefit provided to the Assessee/petitioners in the Circular dated August 3, 2022. This decision was based on the submissions of both parties, particularly the State's acknowledgment of the Central Government's Circular and its intention to issue a similar one, and the petitioners' reliance on this Circular. The Adjudicating Authority was given a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order to pass the fresh order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned adjudication order and the order of the Appellate Authority are contrary to the Circular dated August 3, 2022, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (No. 179/11//2022-GST), concerning Electric Vehicles, and if so, whether the petitioners are entitled to a refund of excess GST collected. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners contended that the impugned orders were in direct contravention of the aforementioned Circular, entitling them to a refund of the excess GST collected. They relied on the Circular to support their claim. Revenue/State's Argument: The State GST authority submitted that while the State had not yet issued a similar circular, it was in the process of doing so. They proposed that the matter be remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority to consider the petitioners' refund claim in light of the Central Government's Circular.