refund application be rejected
Case Title | Gamma Gaana Limited vs Union of India and 3 Others. |
Court | Allahabad High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & Justice Jayant Banerji |
Citation | 2022 (3) GSTPanacea 268 HC Allahabad Writ Tax No 173 of 2022 |
Judgement Date | 03-March-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Nishant Mishra |
Council for Respondent | A.S.G.I C.S.C Dhananjay Awasthi B.P. Singh |
The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & Justice Jayant Banerji has held that Court find that the refund application of the petitioner could not have been rejected by the respondent merely on the ground of delay, ignoring the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Petitioner filed refund application for tax period from April to June, 2018, July to September, 2018 and October to December, 2018, which have been rejected by the impugned order, passed by the respondent no.4 As per impugned order, the period of limitation for filing refund application in terms of Section 54(1) of the CGST/UPGST Act, had expired in September, 2020 and even period extended by the department has also expired on 30.11.2020. Thereafter, petitioner filed refund application on 31.03.2021, which has been rejected by the impugned order on the ground of delay The petitioner submitted that the period between 15.03.2020 the petitioner submitted that the period between 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 has been directed by the Supreme Court to be excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, vide impugned order dated 10.01.2022 in Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022, Suo-Moto Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020. He, therefore, submits that refund application has been arbitrarily rejected by the respondent no.4.
refund application be rejected
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, held that Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 10.01.2022 has been passed due to the prevailing situation on account of the Covid pandemic, directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. Court find that the refund application of the petitioner could not have been rejected by the respondent no.4 merely on the ground of delay, ignoring the aforequoted order of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Under the circumstances, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed Matter is remitted back to the respondent no.4 to decide the refund application of the petitioner in accordance with law, by reasoned and speaking order, expeditiously and preferably within six weeks from the date of presentation of copy of the order, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
refund application be rejected
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Supreme Court directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit: