Lupin Limited Nagpur Vs State of Maharashtra And Ors. (Bombay High Court)
SEZ unit eligible to claim refund of ITC in respect of Input services used for Authorised operations: Bombay HC
The Petitioner, an SEZ unit preferred a refund claim before respondents in terms of Section 54 Read with Rule 89 in respect of unutilised ITC on account of export of goods under an LUT.
However, the Respondents rejected the refund claim filed by the Petitioner on the grounds that the Petitioner being an SEZ unit, is not a person prescribed under the provision of law to claim refund. Refund can only be claimed by the supplier of goods or services.
Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner preferred an Appeal which was also dismissed on the similar grounds. Hence the Petitioner approached Hon’ble High Court relying upon decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India wherein the High Court held that the Petitioner was an eligible person to claim refund. The Revenue also preferred an appeal before Supreme Court in Britania case, however, the same was disposed off by Supreme Court on the grounds of low tax effect.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that the Supreme Court has disposed of the petition by keeping the question of law open. The Court further observed that considering the same, the status as of now is that the law laid down by the Gujarat High Court in Britannia’s case holds the field until a contrary decision is given by any other High Court.
