Case Law Details
AB Enterprises Vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax (Delhi High Court)
Introduction: The Delhi High Court recently addressed a crucial aspect of Goods and Services Tax (GST) refunds in the case of AB Enterprises vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax. This article delves into the court’s findings, particularly focusing on the rejection of GST refunds and the necessity of citing deficiencies.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner contested a communication (Form GST RFD-03) dated 06.04.2022, which highlighted deficiencies in their application for the refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner raised two primary objections: the issuing officer’s competence and the alleged deficiencies exceeding the scope of Rule 89(2) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017.
The application for refund, related to zero-rated supplies in December 2021, was filed with accompanying documents. However, the officer issued the impugned communication, citing deficiencies without specifying the lacking documents. The petitioner argued that all required documents were submitted as per Rule 89(2).
The court noted that the deficiencies mentioned were not detailed in the communication. The respondent later listed the allegedly missing documents, which were not covered under Rule 89(2). The court emphasized that, as per precedent, an application can only be rejected if deficiencies render it incomplete under Rule 90(3). If an application is complete under Rule 89(2), it cannot be rejected.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
