IGST Refund on Ocean Freight Rejected Due to Illegible Bill of Lading: Calcutta HC Remands to Appellate Authority for Fresh Consideration [Read Order]
The Court held that the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to produce a legible copy of the document to substantiate their claim
![IGST Refund on Ocean Freight Rejected Due to Illegible Bill of Lading: Calcutta HC Remands to Appellate Authority for Fresh Consideration [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2026/05/25/2138077-igst-refund-ocean-freight-illegible-bill-of-lading-calcutta-high-court-appellate-authority-fresh-consideration-taxscan.webp "IGST Refund on Ocean Freight Rejected Due to Illegible Bill of Lading: Calcutta HC Remands to Appellate Authority for Fresh Consideration [Read Order]")
The Calcutta High Court remanded an Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) refund matter back to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration, setting aside the rejection order which was based on an illegible Bill of Lading. The Court held that the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to produce a legible copy of the document to substantiate their claim. M/s....
The Calcutta High Court remanded an Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) refund matter back to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration, setting aside the rejection order which was based on an illegible Bill of Lading. The Court held that the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to produce a legible copy of the document to substantiate their claim.
M/s. Indorama India Private Limited, the petitioner, had challenged an order dated April 26, 2024, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The petitioner had initially sought a refund of Rs. 72,31,368/- for IGST paid on ocean freight for imports during June 2018, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India Vs- M/s. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd.
The Refund Sanctioning Authority had originally allowed the claim on February 24, 2023. However, the Appellate Authority allowed the department's appeal and rejected the refund. The sole ground for rejection was that the Bill of Lading provided to prove that a foreign shipping line was engaged was not legible, making it impossible to correlate the documents with the claim.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner was prepared to produce a legible copy of the Bill of Lading before the authority.
The bench of Justice Smita Das De observed that in the facts of the case, the petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to produce the necessary documents so the case could be considered afresh on merits.
The Court directed:
“I direct the appellate authority to consider the case of the petitioner, giving an opportunity to produce a legible copy of the Bill of Lading and any other documents required for consideration by the appellate authority in deciding the appeal.”
Consequently, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the Appellate Authority to conclude the proceedings within one month from the date of the order.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
