Delhi HC Directs Physical Appearance of GST Commissioner concerning over “Harrowing Experience” of Widow Seeking Refund [Read Order]
The Court asked the Assistant Commissioner concerned to physically appear before it on the next date, i.e. May 05
![Delhi HC Directs Physical Appearance of GST Commissioner concerning over “Harrowing Experience” of Widow Seeking Refund [Read Order] Delhi HC Directs Physical Appearance of GST Commissioner concerning over “Harrowing Experience” of Widow Seeking Refund [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Refund-Taxpayer-Rights-Delhi-High-Court-taxscan.jpg)
The Delhi High Court directed the physical appearance of the Assistant GST Commissioner concerning over the “harrowing experience” that a widow had to go through for obtaining a refund from the Department.
The Petitioner-Ms. Bhavna Luthra is the wife of late Mr. Narain Das Luthra who was the proprietor of M/s Hunny Enterprises. He had also registered himself qua M/s Hunny Enterprises with the GST Department and his registration number was ‘07AAVPL0369A1ZP’. Late Mr. Narain Das passed away on 29th November, 2020. The death certificate is placed on record.
Karnataka HC Rejects Actress Ranya Rao’s Bail Plea in Rs. 12.5 Crore Gold Smuggling Case [Read Order]
GST Basics You Can’t Afford to Miss! Get clarity today - Click Here
Upon his demise, an application was made by the Petitioner for cancellation of the GST registration and the same was cancelled with effect from 1st January, 2021 vide order dated 10th August,2021. However, the electronic cash ledger of the firm (M/s Hunny Enterprises) had an excess balance of Rs.10,45,793/- of which the Petitioner widow claimed for refund vide a refund application bearing reference number ARN No, : AA071021U32694M.
The Department denied the aforementioned application, and as a result, the money was taken out of the ledger without being reimbursed to the petitioner or returned back to the ledger. The petitioner then filed a case in the High Court, arguing that the computerized cash ledger is effectively her property, that any money displayed there is hers, and that the GST Department is not allowed to withhold it. The Department committed to recrediting the money into the Electronic Cash Ledger within two weeks on May 9, 2024. Her petition was therefore dismissed.
Bill Printing and Dispatch Held Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service: CESTAT Sets Aside Demand[Read Order]
Master GST from A to Z! No more confusion - Click Here
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. The High Court observed that the present writ petition marks the second instance wherein the Petitioner had to approach the Court for seeking a refund. Further held that “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.”
New to GST? This book is your shortcut to expertise! - Click Here
The present writ petition marks the second instance wherein the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking refund. It is a matter of concern that almost a year ago, the same Petitioner had appeared before a Coordinate Bench of the 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.
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.
The Court asked the Assistant Commissioner concerned to physically appear before it on the next date, i.e. May 05.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates