Freebalance Software Solutions INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Freebalance Software Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the denial of a GST refund. The denial was based on the ground of non-furnishing of supporting documents, as per the order of the adjudicating authority dated 23rd August 2018 and the appellate authority's order dated 23rd December 2021. The petitioner contended that the necessary documents were produced before the appellate authority. The petitioner also submitted a supplementary affidavit before the High Court containing these relevant documents in support of their refund claim.

Held

The Court set aside the impugned order of the appellate authority dated 23rd December 2021. The matter was remanded back to the GST appellate authority to pass a fresh, reasoned, and speaking order. This fresh order must be passed after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or their authorized representatives. Crucially, the appellate authority is directed to consider the documents filed by the petitioner in support of their refund claim, including those submitted via the supplementary affidavit before the High Court. The appellate authority is to pass this fresh order within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority erred in denying the refund claim without considering the supporting documents submitted by the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice, under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act (WBGST Act)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the denial of refund was erroneous as the supporting documents, crucial for substantiating the refund claim, were indeed produced before the appellate authority. They contended that the appellate authority's decision to deny the refund on the sole ground of non-furnishing documents was incorrect, especially since these documents were subsequently placed before the High Court via a supplementary affidavit. The petitioner sought a fresh consideration of their refund claim, taking into account all submitted documentation. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State or its authorities.