Delhi HC Expresses Concern Over “Harrowing Experience” Of Widow Seeking Refund Of Balance In Electronic Cash Ledger Of Deceased Husband's Firm
The Delhi High Court recently recorded the “harrowing experience” that a widow had to go through for obtaining a refund from the GST Department.The GST registration of the firm owned by her now deceased husband was cancelled in view of his death. However, his widow sought a refund of ₹10,45,793/- balance in the electronic cash ledger of the firm.The said application was rejected by...
The Delhi High Court recently recorded the “harrowing experience” that a widow had to go through for obtaining a refund from the GST Department.
The GST registration of the firm owned by her now deceased husband was cancelled in view of his death. However, his widow sought a refund of ₹10,45,793/- balance in the electronic cash ledger of the firm.
The said application was rejected by the Department and subsequently, the amount was debited from the Ledger without either being paid to the petitioner or being re-credited in the Ledger.
The Petitioner had then moved the High Court, contending that the electronic cash ledger is in effect a deemed instrument belonging to her, any amount shown therein belongs to her and the GST Department cannot hold back the said amount.
On 9th May, 2024, the Department had agreed to recredit the amount into the Electronic Cash Ledger within two weeks. Accordingly, her petition was disposed of.
Despite this, the refund was not granted and rather, an order came to be passed by the GST Department holding that the refund would not be liable to be paid, as the Petitioner is not a person registered with the GST Department.
Aggrieved, the Petitioner again approached the Court.
At the outset, the High Court observed that the present writ petition marks the second instance wherein the Petitioner had to approach the Court for seeking refund.
“It is a matter of concern that almost a year ago, the same Petitioner had appeared before a Coordinate Bench of this Court, which, after considering the matter, directed that the refund amount be re-credited within a period of two weeks. It is unfortunate to see that despite the said amount being in the Electronic cash ledger, the refund has not been given to the Petitioner till date,” Court said.
It then queried the Department as to the reason for not processing the refund.
The Department submitted that the essential documents supporting the factum of death of the Petitioner's husband were not placed along with the application for the refund.
Petitioner on the other hand contended that the death of her husband already stands proved vide the order of cancellation of GST registration of his firm.
Hearing this, the Court asked the Assistant Commissioner concerned to physically appear before it on the next date, i.e. May 05.
Appearance: Mr. Puneet Rai, Mr. Sushil Gaba, Mr. Kapil Sharma & Ms. Srishti Sharma, Advocates for Petitioner; Piyush Beriwal, Advocate for respondent
Case title: Bhavna Luthra L/H Of Sh. Narain Das Luthra, Proprietor Of M/S. Hunny Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner, Range 8, CGST, Delhi & Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 481
Case no.: W.P.(C) 4551/2025