Zephyr International VS Principal Commissioner Of Customs

In a courtroom setting, Mr. Varis Isani, the advocate representing the petitioner, a partnership firm, presented arguments asserting that the firm had engaged in the export of goods from November 2019 to June 2020. The petitioner contended that they were entitled under the law to receive refunds for Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST). However, authorities had withheld refunds amounting to Rs. 1,31,89,893/- and Rs. 6,98,991/-, which also included duty drawback amounts.

Mr. Varis Isani, the learned advocate for the petitioner, argued in a detailed summary before the court. The petitioner, a partnership firm, filed a petition asserting that it had exported goods between November 2019 and June 2020. The firm claimed eligibility for a refund of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) under relevant statutory provisions. However, authorities withheld refunds totaling Rs. 1,31,89,893/- for IGST and Rs. 6,98,991/- for duty drawback.

In response to these grievances, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking relief. The prayer included a demand for the immediate sanction of the IGST refund pertaining to the exported goods, categorized as “Zero Rated Supplies,” as indicated in the shipping bills.

In a legal proceeding, Mr. Varis Isani, acting as the advocate for the petitioner, a partnership firm, presented the case. The petitioner firm asserted that it had exported goods between November 2019 and June 2020. They claimed eligibility for a refund of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) as per the relevant provisions of the Act. However, authorities withheld refunds totaling Rs. 1,31,89,893/- for IGST and Rs. 6,98,991/- for duty drawback.

Due to these grievances, the petitioner filed a petition requesting the following reliefs:

1. Immediate sanction of the IGST refund for the exported goods (“Zero Rated Supplies”) mentioned in the shipping bills.

2. Payment of interest at 24% on the IGST refund amount from the date of the shipping bills until the actual payment to the petitioner.

During the consideration of the petition, the advocate for the petitioner informed the court that the primary prayer for the grant of IGST refund no longer required adjudication as the petitioner had already received the full refund. However, he emphasized that the claim for interest payment remained unresolved, urging the court to grant interest on the refunded IGST amount as per the petitioner’s plea.

Mr. Varis Isani, an advocate representing the petitioner, presented arguments in a case where a partnership firm filed a petition claiming refunds of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) and duty drawback for goods exported between November 2019 and June 2020. The petitioner alleged that authorities had withheld refunds totaling Rs. 1,31,89,893/- for IGST and Rs. 6,98,991/- for duty drawback.

In the petition, the firm sought:

1. Immediate sanction of IGST refunds for zero-rated supplies.

2. Payment of interest at 24% per annum on the IGST refund amount from the date of shipping bills until actual payment.

During the court proceedings, Mr. Varis Isani informed the court that the principal prayer for IGST refund had been fulfilled as the petitioner had received the entire refund amount. However, he pressed for the prayer concerning interest payment, arguing that it still stood.

The discussion also referred to Section 56 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which mandates interest payment on delayed refunds. The section stipulates that if a tax refund, ordered under Section 54(5), is not processed within sixty days of application receipt, interest is payable at a rate specified by the government, not exceeding six percent. This applies from the day after the sixty-day period expires until the refund is made, particularly in cases where the refund stems from a finalized order by an adjudicating authority, appellate body, tribunal, or court.

In a legal proceeding before the court, Mr. Varis Isani, the advocate representing the petitioner, a partnership firm, argued that the firm had exported goods from November 2019 to June 2020. The firm claimed it was eligible for a refund of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) under the provisions of the Act. However, the authorities had withheld refunds totaling Rs. 1,31,89,893/- for IGST and Rs. 6,98,991/- for duty drawback.

The petitioner filed a petition seeking several reliefs, primarily requesting the authorities to sanction the withheld IGST refund for the goods exported under “Zero Rated Supplies” and to pay interest at 24% per annum on the refunded IGST amount from the date of shipping bills until the date of payment.

During the court proceedings, Mr. Varis Isani informed the court that the main prayer for the IGST refund had been fulfilled as the authorities had already refunded the entire amount. However, he pressed for the prayer regarding interest payment on the refunded amount, arguing that this claim remained unresolved.

Section 56 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which deals with interest on delayed refunds, was cited. It stipulates that if a tax refund ordered under section 54 is not refunded within sixty days of the application, interest must be paid at a rate not exceeding six percent per annum, as specified by the Government. This rate increases to nine percent per annum if the refund is delayed beyond sixty days after an order from an adjudicating authority, appellate tribunal, or court.

Given that the authorities had already paid the refund amount, the court noted that the petitioner could file an application before the Goods and Services Tax Authority to claim interest, as provided under the statutory provisions. Thus, while the primary relief for the IGST refund had been resolved, the matter of interest payment remained open for further action by the petitioner.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: