CHEGG India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court)
Appellate Authority empowered to re-adjudicate refund claims taking into considerations new documentary evidence, facts and law
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chegg India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner CGST [W.P.(C) 11718/2025 & batch, order dated September 08, 2025] held that the Appellate Authority is empowered under Section 107(11) of the CGST Act to comprehensively re-adjudicate refund claims, including considering fresh documents and all periods together, and must avoid the inconsistencies caused by staggered, piecemeal adjudication.
Facts:
Chegg India Private Limited (“the Petitioner”) is an education technology company that exports software, content, and IT/ITES services to its US-based parent and sought refunds of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) for various tax periods. Multiple Orders-in-Original partly or fully rejected refund claims on grounds such as insufficient documentary evidence and the Petitioner not undertaking “export of service.”
The Assistant Commissioner CGST (“the Respondent”) in various orders held the Petitioner to be an “intermediary” or otherwise failed to find the services as eligible “export of services,” resulting in denial of significant ITC refunds. Rejections alternated with partial grants in different periods, creating contradictions.
The Petitioner contended that the nature of services and documents across all refund claims was essentially identical, yet the authorities had taken inconsistent and irreconcilable stands, leading to unfair denial of refunds. The Petitioner asserted all relevant documents had been submitted and further documentary proof was filed at the appellate stage.
