Chinnarasu vs. The Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, Chinnarasu, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent, the Commissioner of Hindu Charitable and Religious Endowments, to refund GST amounts. The amounts in dispute are Rs. 47,520/- for prasadam and Rs. 1,19,880/- for the collection of human hair. The petitioner submitted a representation on 08.11.2025 seeking this refund, based on Notification No.2/2017–Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and a circular dated 14.05.2025. However, the representation had not been considered by the respondents. The learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 stated that the refund request would be considered in accordance with law.
Held
The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's request for the refund of the GST amount. The first respondent was instructed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, with no costs awarded. The specific entitlement to the refund based on the notification and circular was not decided by the Court in this order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of GST amounting to Rs. 47,520/- for prasadam and Rs. 1,19,880/- for the collection of human hair, based on Notification No.2/2017–Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and a circular dated 14.05.2025? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that they are entitled to the refund of GST paid on prasadam and human hair collection, citing the aforementioned notification and circular. They argued that their representation seeking this refund, submitted on 08.11.2025, has not been acted upon by the respondents. Revenue/State's arguments: The learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the request for refund would be considered in accordance with law. No specific arguments were made regarding the merits of the refund claim or the applicability of the notification and circular.
Sections Cited
Notification No.2/2017–Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD)No.3024 of 2026 Chinnarasu ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Charitable and Religious Endowments, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai. 2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, Thanajvur. 3.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Veerakaliamman Temple, Perambur, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District. 4.The Principal Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, No.26, GST Bhawan, 1, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Thousand Lights West, Nungambakkam, Chennai.
... Respondents 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, thereby directing the first respondent to refund the GST amount of Rs.47,520/- (Rupees Forty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty only) with respect to the prasadam and Rs.1,19,880/- (Rupees One Lakh Nineteen Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty only) for the collection of human hair
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 Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.