The Calcutta High Court in a recent statutory development has provided a significant judgment for the case of Sunil Kumar Poddar vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeal) pertinent to the rejection of a Goods and Services Tax (GST) refund.
The applicant has been involved in zero-rated goods supply asking for a refund of the unused ITC however suffers the rejection based on the non-upholding of the shipping information in Form GST RFD-01. The article is concerned with the information on the case and the ruling of the court.
Background- The applicant has not made any goods supply and filed Form GST RFD-01 asking for the refund of the unused ITC. However, the claim was cancelled because of the failure to upload the shipping details by the applicant in the official portal. The petition to the Additional Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax & CX, Siliguri Appeal Commissionerate, was dismissed on March 23, 2023.
Petitioner opinions- In his appeal the applicant, argued that because of the misconception of the law, the shipping details were not uploaded during the time of asking for the refund.
The bills of shipping were annexed during the appeal. The applicant asks to set aside the order of the appellate authority and a direction for a refund of the whole amount.
The Circular and Respondent’s Stand: On Circular No. 125/44/2019, the appellate authority relied which underscores the verification of the shipping bill information via the ICEGATE site.
The council contended that the applicant through not incorporating the information of the shipping in GSTR-1 losses to follow the law, proving the rejection of the claim of refund.
Court’s Observations and Ruling: The court deemed that the applicant has all the pertinent shipping information but is unable to upload it because of the misconception of the law. The attempt to revise the GSTR-1 to add the shipping information failed via the rejection of the portal quoting a prior refund claim against the shipping bill.
As per the court when an assessee has valid shipping bills but cannot upload the same during the claim of the refund then the law must permit the amendment of these inadvertent mistakes.
Important: Revised Return Under GST: Govt Fails to Respond to Supreme Court’s Order
The system’s strength is been criticized by the court and underlines the requirement for the authorities to secure the power to address the issues that have been suffered by taxpayers.
The court while observing the contention of the authorities for the electronic systems limitations stated the assistant commissioner to acknowledge the hardcopy of the shipping bills that the applicant submitted. For verification, the applicant was allowed to revise the information on the GSTR-1.
Complete Details
The need for flexibility in the Goods and Services Tax refund process is mentioned in the judgment, considering that genuine errors could take place and the law must furnish the avenues for amendment.
In Sunil Kumar Poddar vs. Additional Commissioner, the decision of the court serves as a reminder that procedural needs must not override substantive justice particularly if the assessee has valid documentation. The same case sets a precedent for the more nuanced and practical approach while operating with the refund claims concerning the Goods and services tax.
| Case Title | Sunil Kumar Poddar Vs Additional Commissioner |
| Case Number | W.P.A 2900 of 2023 |
| Date | 30.01.2024 |
| for the Petitioner | Dr. Avinash Podder, Mr. Dhiraj Lakhotia, Ms. Radhika Agarwal, Ms. Khushi Kundu |
| for CGST | Mr. Ratan Banik, Mr. Bishwaraj Agarwal |
| Calcutta High Court | Read Order |
