Case Law Details
Lupin Limited Anr. Vs Union of India & Anr (Sikkim High Court)
Introduction: In this case Lupin Limited, a prominent pharmaceutical company, challenged a recovery order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise, Gangtok Division. The dispute arose from the alleged excess cash refund under the Budgetary Support Scheme due to the petitioner’s purported non-utilization of the entire input tax credit available in Form 2A. This article delves into the details of the case, highlighting the court’s directive for reconsideration and the implications of reduced demand on the original order.
Background of the Case: Lupin Limited, engaged in the manufacturing and sale of drugs, availed the benefits of the Budgetary Support Scheme, resulting in a sanctioned refund. Subsequently, an audit revealed discrepancies, asserting that Lupin had not fully utilized the available input tax credit in Form 2A, leading to an alleged excess cash refund.
Contentions Raised: Lupin’s defense rested on two key contentions: First, it argued that Form 2A serves as a facilitator, and the entire credit reflected in it cannot be utilized as such. Second, Lupin asserted that the documents it produced in its defense were not duly considered during the proceedings.
Court’s Directive and Subsequent Developments: The Hon’ble High Court of Sikkim, in response to Lupin’s contentions, directed the Revenue to examine the additional information furnished by the petitioner. Following this directive, a report was submitted, resulting in a reduction of the demand from the original amount. Recognizing the reduced demand, the court emphasized that the original order could not sustain.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
