Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Privaте Limited Vs Excise And Taxation Commissioner And Ors (Panjab Haryana high court)
Absence of a Reasoned Order While Rejecting Condonation Plea is Unsustainable in Law: Panjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that rejection of an application for condonation of delay in receipt of export remittances under Rule 96A(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (“the CGST Rules”) through a mere communication is legally unsustainable. The petitioner had sought condonation for delayed receipt of export proceeds, but the authority rejected the request via an intimation stating lack of satisfactory grounds. Upon examination, the Court found that no formal, reasoned order had been passed by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, and only internal notes existed. The Court emphasized that administrative or quasi-judicial decisions must reflect proper application of mind, consideration of facts, and provide an opportunity of hearing. Since these principles were not followed, the impugned communication was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law after granting due opportunity to the petitioner.
Facts:
Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt Ltd (“the Petitioner”) exported services and sought condonation of delay in receipt of remittance in convertible foreign exchange in terms of Rule 96A(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The Petitioner submitted an application before the Excise and Taxation Commissioner requesting condonation of delay in receipt of export proceeds.
