GST Refund cannot be Rejected without Granting 15 Days’ Reply and Personal Hearing as Mandated u/r 92: Jharkhand HC [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court held that a GST refund application cannot be rejected without granting the taxpayer fifteen days’ time to file a reply and without providing an opportunity of personal hearing, as mandatorily required under Rule 92 of the CGST and JGST Rules, 2017.

Carbon Resources Private Limited, the petitioner, filed two writ petitions before the Jharkhand High Court challenging the rejection of its GST refund claim by the Central Goods andServices Tax authorities. The petitioner assailed the refund rejection order dated 23 May 2025 passed in Form GST RFD-06 by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Division Giridih, as well as a subsequent rectification order dated 30 May 2025 which affirmed the rejection.

The petitioner contended that the refund claim was rejected without following the procedure prescribed under Rule 92(3) of the CGST/JGST Rules. According to the petitioner, although the rule mandates issuance of a notice in Form GST RFD-08, grant of fifteen days’ time to file a reply, and an opportunity of personal hearing before rejecting a refund, the department granted only seven days to respond.

The petitioner’s counsel further stated that despite repeated requests, no personal hearing was afforded before passing the refund rejection order. They argued that the rejection of the refund without adhering to the mandatory timeline and without granting a hearing amounted to a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. They also argued that the rectification order did not cure these defects and merely reiterated the earlier rejection.

On behalf of the revenue, it was not disputed that the petitioner was granted only seven days’ time to file a reply instead of the statutorily prescribed fifteen days. They also not disputed that a personal hearing was not granted before passing the refund rejection order.

The Division Bench comprising Chief JusticeTarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar observed that there was admitted non-compliance with Rule 92(3) of the CGST/JGST Rules. The court observed that the rule clearly mandates granting fifteen days’ time to submit a reply and providing an opportunity of hearing before rejecting a refund application.

The court explained that reducing the statutory period and denying a hearing vitiated the entire proceedings. The court also pointed out that the rectification order did not address or rectify the procedural lapses committed earlier.

The court held that the refund rejection order and the rectification order were unsustainable in law due to a violation of mandatory procedure and principles of natural justice. The court set aside both orders and remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Division Giridih, for fresh consideration.

The authority was directed to grant the petitioner fifteen days’ time to file a reply and to provide a personal hearing before passing a fresh order. The parties were directed to appear before the authority on 10 December 2025. The writ petitions were allowed.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates