Team HR Services Private Ltd VS Union Of India

Petitioner has been dismissed by the Tribunal on 15th July, 2019. The petitioner contends that despite the Tribunal’s order allowing their appeal and the subsequent dismissal of the revenue’s appeal, the Assistant Commissioner has failed to initiate the refund of the pre-deposit amount of Rs.2,38,00,000/- along with accrued interest. Therefore, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, GST- Delhi East, GST Division, to immediately refund the pre-deposit amount with interest.

February, 2018 allowed the petitioner’s appeal, thereby setting aside the Commissioner’s order and declaring that the petitioner was entitled to the refund of the Rs.2,38,00,000/- deposited under protest. Subsequently, a revenue appeal filed by the respondents against this decision was dismissed by this Court on 24th August, 2018, affirming that the respondents had no right to withhold the petitioner’s money. The petitioner now seeks a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, GST- Delhi East, GST Division, to immediately refund the deposited amount with interest, considering the final judicial determinations in favor of the petitioner.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks mandamus, directing the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, GST- Delhi East, GST Division, to forthwith refund with interest, “pre-deposit” of Rs.2,38,00,000/- made by the petitioner. It is stated that the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 3rd October, 2011 passed by the Commissioner has been finally allowed by the Tribunal through an order dated 22nd February, 2018. The revenue’s appeal to this Court, SERTA No.23/2018, was subsequently dismissed on 24th August, 2018, affirming that the respondents had no right to retain the petitioner’s money.

The petitioner contends: (i) an audit/investigation from 24th July, 2006 to 28th July, 2006 resulted in a deposit of Rs.2,38,00,000/- made under protest on 27th October, 2006, pressured by officers without issuance of a show cause notice; (ii) despite protest, the petitioner informed the respondents of the deposit’s nature, and subsequent to a show cause notice issued on 28th July, 2008, demanding Rs.4,66,39,061/- in service tax for the period of 1st July, 2003 to 31st March, 2005, the deposited amount was acknowledged; (iii) the Commissioner (Adjudication) Service Tax, New Delhi confirmed the demand through an order dated 3rd October, 2011, and appropriated the deposited amount towards the same; (iv) an appeal to the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) was granted interim stay on 24th September, 2012, waiving further pre-deposit, upheld until resolution of the appeal on 15th October, 2013; (v) Circulars by the Central Board of Excise and Customs clarified entitlement to refund upon appeal success; (vi) the Tribunal’s final order on 22nd February, 2018 favored the petitioner, citing limitation bar on the demand; (vii) a refund application was made on 2nd May, 2018; (viii) the Tribunal’s decision was challenged in SERTA No.23/2018, dismissed on 24th August, 2018, affirming the Tribunal’s ruling.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks mandamus to direct the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, GST- Delhi East, GST Division, to immediately refund with interest a “pre-deposit” of Rs.2,38,00,000/- made by the petitioner. The petitioner’s appeal against the Commissioner’s October 3, 2011 order was upheld by the Tribunal on February 22, 2018, and subsequently, the revenue’s appeal to this Court (SERTA No.23/2018) was dismissed on August 24, 2018, confirming that the respondents had no right to withhold the petitioner’s money.

The petitioner contends that the deposit was made under protest during a 2006 audit/investigation by Service Tax officers, despite no formal notice being issued. The Service Tax Department issued a show cause notice in 2008 demanding Rs.4,66,39,061/- in service tax, acknowledging the earlier Rs.2,38,00,000/- deposit. The Commissioner (Adjudication) upheld the demand in an October 3, 2011 order, which the petitioner appealed to the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The Tribunal granted interim relief, staying the balance amount pending appeal, based on the petitioner’s protest deposit.

In subsequent legal clarifications (Circular No.984/08/2014-CX and Master Circular No.1053/02/2017-CX), it was affirmed that successful appellants are entitled to refunds with interest. The Tribunal’s final decision on February 22, 2018, favoring the petitioner due to limitations on the demand, prompted refund requests. Despite these rulings, subsequent refund requests in May 2018 and March 2019 went unfulfilled, leading to court interventions and contempt proceedings for non-compliance with refund orders.

The matter, marred by delays and administrative inaction, underscores the petitioner’s ongoing struggle to reclaim the deposited funds rightfully deemed refundable under law.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: