Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Agnus Exim Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (Calcutta High Court)
Appeal Number : WPA 15729 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/08/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Agnus Exim Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (Calcutta High Court)

In the case of Agnus Exim Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner, the Calcutta High Court addressed the disallowance of a refund claim due to a wrongful filing of export invoices in GSTR 1. The petitioner, Agnus Exim Private Limited, had mistakenly filed export invoices worth ₹1,70,61,224.07 as “export with payment of tax” instead of “export without payment of tax.” Although the petitioner later corrected this error by submitting a rectified GSTR 9, the tax authority denied the refund. The petitioner argued that since the error had been rectified, the benefits of the corrected GSTR 9 should be extended. The court took note of the refund sanction order dated December 8, 2022, and acknowledged the rectification. Consequently, the court directed the State respondents to take appropriate action and granted time for further instructions. The case is scheduled for additional consideration on August 27, 2024.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.

2. Mr. Chakrabarty, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by drawing attention of this Court to the refund sanction order dated 8th December, 2022, would submit that the authority despite acknowledging the fact that the petitioner had rectified its mistake by filing GSTR 9 has disallowed the same since, it was found that export invoices to the tune of Rs.1,70,61,224.07 were wrongfully filed in the GSTR1 as export with payment of tax instead of export without payment of tax. He submits that once, the authority has appreciated that the aforesaid error had been rectified by filing GSTR9, benefit of such rectification ought to have been extended to the petitioner.

3. Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the State respondents.

4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I direct the State respondents to take appropriate instruction in the matter.

5. List this matter in the daily supplementary list on 27th August, 2024 for further consideration.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
October 2024
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031