Case Details: Shree K R Engineering Works - [2024] 162 taxmann.com 896 (Rajasthan)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Dr Pushpendra Singh Bhati & Yogendra Kumar Purohit, JJ.
- Sheetal Kumbhat for the Petitioner.
- Ankur Mathur & Ms Shreshtha Mathur for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner was a registered person under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner was involved in the manufacture and export of goods. The petitioner filed a refund application under the accumulated ITC category. On realization of an arithmetical error on the part of the petitioner, the petitioner filed another refund application of the differential amount under the category ‘any other’ as supplementary application for the refund of the differential amount cannot be filed on the portal under the same category. Therefore, there was no option for the petitioner to submit the application under the category ‘any other’.
The refund claim was denied by the authorities stating that the category under which such supplementary claims were lodged was not applicable in the case of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court observed that the petitioner was legally entitled to the refund of a sum, but it erroneously lodged claims for a lower amount due to inadvertent arithmetical error of the employee of the petitioner. The High Court held that the claim of the petitioner cannot be rejected without examining the same by the respondent authority on its own merits and in accordance with the law. The High Court allowed the petitioner to furnish the refund applications manually for the differential amount.
The post HC Directs Assessee to File Refund Application Manually if There Was No Option to File Supplementary Refund Claim appeared first on Taxmann Blog.