Case Law Details
TMA International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court)
Thus, the only other question left for consideration is: as to whether the petitioners should be paid any interest for delayed remittance of refund on account of IGST?
Mr. Samar Bansal, who appears on behalf of the petitioners, in support of his plea that the interest should be paid, has cited the judgement dated 27.06.2019, passed by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court, in M/s Amit Cotton Industries vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs, (2019) 75 GST 33 (Guj). In particular, reliance has been placed on paragraph 36 of the said judgment. For the sake of convenience, the observations made in paragraph 36 of the judgment are extracted hereafter:
“36. In the result, this writ-application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to immediately sanction the refund of the IGST paid in regard to the goods exported, i.e. „zero rated supplies‟, with 7% simple interest from the date of shipping bills till the date of actual refund.”
We are in agreement with the principle set forth in the aforesaid paragraph. Therefore, while granting refund to the petitioners, the petitioners will be granted interest at the rate of 7% simple, from the date, when the shipping bills were filed by them, till the date of actual refund, which, in this case, ought not to go beyond 26.04.2021.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
