Palo Alto Networks (India) Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner (Bombay High Court)
The petitioner applied for refund on the ground that it is an exporter of services. The refund was sanctioned. However, the appellate authority held that the petitioner is an “intermediary” and not eligible for benefit of export of services. The petitioner approached the Hon’ble High Court against order passed by the appellate authority as GST Tribunal has not been constituted till date. The revenue contended that writ petition should not be admitted in wake of alternate remedy. All similar matters were tagged by the Hon’ble High court on this issue.
The reliance was placed on judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana holding that the assesses cannot be expected to wait till eternity till GST Tribunal is formed and is functional.
The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay directed the CBIC to file an affidavit. The affidavit was filed stating that there is no appeal filed against the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana judgment and it has been accepted. Thus, there is no alternate remedy and the Hon’ble High court can decide the case of merits. Accordingly, all matters relating to refund would be decided on merits, on a case to case basis, by the Hon’ble High court.
The matter was argued by Ld. Counsel Bharat Raichandani
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
