Delhi HC directs to issue SCN if Duty Drawback and IGST Refund is to be Denied [Read Order]
The alert is an internal mechanism of Goods and Services Tax Act (GST) for scrutinizing the exports claimed the respondent
Delhi HC SCN Order – Duty Drawback Denial SCN – IGST Refund SCN – SCN for Refund Denial – Delhi HC Duty Drawback – taxscan
Delhi HC SCN Order – Duty Drawback Denial SCN – IGST Refund SCN – SCN for Refund Denial – Delhi HC Duty Drawback – taxscan
The Delhi High Court directed the authorities to issue Show Cause Notice (SCN) if the Duty Drawback and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Refund is denied by the authorities. The SCN indicates the reasons for the same to be issued to the petitioner as early as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from date.
The Petitioner, M/S. Grahil Enterprises LLP represented by Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, Mrs. Anjali Jha Manish & Ms. Tania Sharma, Advocates, filed the petition praying for various reliefs. From these it is apparent that the petitioner seeks three types of reliefs.
Detailed discussion on filing of ITR-7 | Join Now
First in respect of the alert issued by the concerned authorities against the petitioner. Second, is regarding the provisional release of the consignments covered under specified shipping bills (eight in number). And the third, is regarding processing of the claim for refund of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and drawback.
The Respondent, Union of India & Ors represented by Mr. Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Mr. Ratan Prakash & Ms. Samiksha, Advocates.
Mr. Harpreet Singh & Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs. for R-2 to 6. Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal & Mr. Shubham Goel, Advocates. for R-7.
Detailed discussion on filing of ITR-7 | Join Now
In regarding the Petitioner’s grievances about the alert, Mr. Harpreet Singh, appearing for the respondent no.2 to 6 states, on instruction, that the alert was issued for the purpose of examining the goods attempted to be exported by the petitioner.
Counsel submitted that ‘alert’ is an internal mechanism for scrutinizing the exports, and the said goods have been examined and the investigation report has been submitted as a result of which the alert is no longer operative. Since it is confirmed that the alert is no longer operative, no further orders are required to be passed in this regard.
Detailed discussion on filing of ITR-7 | Join Now
In case of the petitioner's grievances regarding the release of the consignment, Mr.Harpeet Singh submits that the consignment has been provisionally released and there is no any obstruction for the petitioner to export the same.
The Respondent nos 2 to 6 are bound to the statement of no obstruction for the petitioner to export the consignment covered under the shipping bills.
In view of which, every grievance of the petitioner stands satisfied and no further order is required to be passed on it, the court observed.
In regard to the petitioner's prayer for processing the refund, Harpeet Singh stated that the same would be processed in accordance with law and if the same is required to be denied, a proper SCN will be served to the petitioner.
Detailed discussion on filing of ITR-7 | Join Now
The Division bench comprising Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Sachin Datta directed the respondents to process the petitioner's refund claim and if the same is denied, then a proper SCN indicating the reasons for the rejection to be issued as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight weeks from date.
The Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
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
