Agriex & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr (Gujarat High Court)
Material Facts
The petitioner-company filed an application on 15.12.2023 seeking refund of ₹1,63,70,582 towards Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid on exports covered by shipping bills dated 08.05.2023 to 17.07.2023. Alternatively, it sought amendment of the shipping bills to reflect payment of IGST instead of exports under Letter of Undertaking (LUT), if required for processing the refund.
The respondents did not dispute that the goods had been exported. The exported goods were rice (pre-packaged and labelled), falling under Chapter Heading 1006 of Notification No. 1/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, attracting 5% IGST. The petitioner stated that omission to mention IGST in the shipping bills was an inadvertent error.
Procedural History
A show cause notice dated 29.12.2023 was issued under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. By order dated 22.02.2024, the Customs authorities rejected the refund application, holding that the invoices had been amended from LUT to IGST paid after export and that no documentary evidence existed at the time of export to permit amendment under Section 149.
Legal Issues
- Whether the refund application ought to be considered under Rule 96 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
- Whether rejection based on Section 149 of the Customs Act alone was justified.
Relevant Statutory Provisions
- Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.
- Rule 96, particularly sub-rule (4), of the CGST Rules, 2017.
- Notification No. 1/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
Court’s Findings and Reasoning
