Case Law Details
Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex Vs Union Of India (Kerala High Court)
Introduction: In a recent legal development, the Kerala High Court addressed the case of Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex Vs Union Of India, involving a proprietorship concern named ‘Padiken Silks.’ The petitioner, registered under the CGST Act/SGST ACT, 2017, sought resolution for pending refund applications related to inter-state inward supply of goods.
Background: Padiken Silks, during the financial year 2017-2018, received both inter-state and intrastate inward supplies of goods. Claiming credit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) under IGST for inter-state supplies amounting to Rs.26,44,557.54, the petitioner contended that, in the absence of outward supply, the entire output tax liability for CGST and IGST should be set off against the ITC under IGST. Additionally, the petitioner had filed applications for the refund of IGST wrongly paid.
Pending Applications: The applications for refund, documented in Ext.P15 to Ext.P23, were awaiting consideration before the 5th respondent. The petitioner, seeking a resolution to the pending matter, approached the Kerala High Court for redressal.
Court’s Decision: In its judgment, the court acknowledged the pending nature of the refund applications and directed the 5th respondent to expedite the consideration process. The court disposed of the writ petition with a clear directive to the 5th respondent to pass appropriate orders on the refund applications of Padiken Silks in Ext.P15 to Ext.P23. The court emphasized that the decision should be made expeditiously in accordance with the law, preferably within a period of two months.
Significance of the Case: The case of Padiken Silks highlights the challenges faced by businesses in navigating the complexities of GST regulations, particularly concerning input tax credits and refund claims. The court’s intervention underscores the need for a swift and efficient resolution of such disputes to ensure fair treatment for businesses operating under the GST framework.
Conclusion: The resolution of the Padiken Silks case by the Kerala High Court serves as a reminder of the importance of timely and judicious consideration of refund applications under GST. The court’s directive to the 5th respondent to expedite the process reflects a commitment to providing businesses with a fair and efficient mechanism for addressing GST-related concerns. This case sets a precedent for the expeditious resolution of similar disputes, contributing to the overall ease of doing business in the country.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is running a proprietorship concern with the name and style, ‘Padiken Silks’. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the CGST Act/SGST ACT, 2017 and Rules thereunder. According to the petitioner, in the financial year 2017-2018 the petitioner had received various inter-state inward supply of goods, as well as from intrastate inward supply. For the inter-state supplies, the petitioner had claimed credit of ITC under IGST for an amount of Rs.26,44,557.54/-. According to the petitioner, as there was no outward supply, the entire output tax liability pertaining to CGST and IGST should be set off against the ITC under IGST for Rs.26,44,557.54/-. The petitioner had also filed applications for refund of IGST wrongly paid by him.
2. These application in Ext.P15 to Ext.P23 are pending consideration before the 5th respondent.
3. Considering the fact that the applications are pending before the 5th respondent for consideration, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 5th respondent to pass appropriate orders on the refund applications of the petitioner in Ext.P15 to Ext.P23 expeditiously in accordance with the law, preferably within a period of two months. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
