MSD Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (Kerala High Court)
The Kerala High Court considered a GST refund application under Section 54 for 2017-18. The petitioner’s online refund application was acknowledged on 12.02.2019, while its manual application was filed on 14.11.2019. The refund was rejected on the ground that the hard copy was filed beyond the statutory two-year period under Rule 97A of the CGST Rules. The appellate authority also rejected the petitioner’s appeal.
The Court examined Rule 97A and held that it permits manual filing in addition to electronic filing. Since the online refund application had admittedly been filed on 12.02.2019, the Court held that the refund application ought to have been considered with reference to that date. The rejection was therefore held illegal and arbitrary.
The Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the rejection order and directed the first respondent to reconsider and dispose of the refund application in accordance with law within three months.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is an assesee under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax/ State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The dispute in this writ petition is with reference to an application seeking refund filed under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). According to the petitioner, the refund application has been presented within the statutory prescription of two years as evidenced by Ext.P12 receipt, as per which, the application is filed admittedly on 12.02.2019. Straightaway it may be noticed that the application acknowledged by Ext.P12 is the online application filed under the statute. However, this application has been processed by the impugned order at Ext.P2 with reference to the mandate under Rule 97A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) concluding that the petitioner has chosen to file the “hard copy” of the application only on 14.11.2019, which is well beyond the statutory prescription of two years. Stating this reason, the application seeking refund with respect to the assessment year 2017-18 has been rejected by the impugned order at Ext.P2.
