28 Sep 2022 6:45 AM GMT
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has relied on the notification dated 05.07.2022 and held that the period from 1st March, 2020 to 28th February, 2022, for the computation of the period of limitation for filing refund applications shall stand excluded.The division bench of Justice C. Praveen Kumar and Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu has observed that the application for refund was not made beyond...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has relied on the notification dated 05.07.2022 and held that the period from 1st March, 2020 to 28th February, 2022, for the computation of the period of limitation for filing refund applications shall stand excluded.
The division bench of Justice C. Praveen Kumar and Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu has observed that the application for refund was not made beyond the period of limitation and remanded the matter back to the assessing authority for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.
The petitioner/assessee is in the business of trading coal. The assessee claimed that he is entitled to a refund of tax paid on supplies in terms of Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Andhra Pradesh State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 89 of the GST Rules.
The petitioner filed a refund application for the tax period May, 2018 to May, 2019 on 22.09.2021. However, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 12.10.2021 by the respondent, proposing to reject the application on the ground that the application made by the petitioner is barred by limitation. In the notice, the respondent asked the petitioner to furnish a reply as to why his request should not be rejected. Since the application was to be made beyond the period of two years prescribed under Section 54(14) of the CGST Act coupled with Circular dated 20.07.2021, the respondent passed the order rejecting the request of the petitioner.
The issue raised was whether the refund application filed by the petitioner was barred by limitation according to the recent notification no. 13/2022—Central Tax dated July 5, 2022.
The petitioner submitted that in view of the subsequent Notification dated 05.07.2022, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, the rejection of the application for a refund is bad in law.
According to the department, the order issued by the authorities based on the circular dated 20.07.2021, cannot be faulted. There is no illegality in the order passed by the respondent.
The court, while setting aside the order, held that the application for a refund was not made beyond the period of limitation.
Case Title: M/S. Gandhar oil refinery (India) Limited v. Assistant commissioner of sales tax
Citation: Writ Petition No.24873 of 2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 126
Counsel For Petitioner: Advocate P. Karthik Ramana
Counsel For Respondent: Government Pleader T.C.D. Sekhar
Click Here To Read Order