Case Law Details
Atin Krishna Vs U.O.I. (Allahabad High Court)
The claim of the petitioner is that there is no ‘export’ of goods since the goods do not have a specific destination. It is however, observed that the facts of the four cases relied upon by the petitioner in the present petition are of a different nature as compared to the operation undertaken from the DFS. In all the four cases, the destination of the goods were very clear viz aircraft (in Burmah Sheel and Narang Hotel) and ship (in Coching Coal and Madras Marine). Thus, the destination was within the Indian territorial waters. In the present case of DFS, it is very clear that if a foreign destination of the foreign going passenger, the passenger also acts as a carrier and the goods are appropriated outside India. In view thereof, it is clear that the decisions relied upon by the petitioner are misplaced, have no relevance to the facts of the present PIL and therefore cannot be relied upon in the context of the business undertaken by the answering respondent.
In view of above discussion, we find that exemption under GST on goods supplied to and from DFS is rightly conferred and the claims of any accumulated unutilized ITC are refundable to respondent. The petition is devoid of merit and the same deserves to be dismissed.
The claim of the petitioner is that there is no ‘export’ of goods since the goods do not have a specific destination. It is however, observed that the facts of the four cases relied upon by the petitioner in the present petition are of a different nature as compared to the operation undertaken from the DFS. In all the four cases, the destination of the goods were very clear viz aircraft (in Burmah Sheel and Narang Hotel) and ship (in Coching Coal and Madras Marine). Thus, the destination was within the Indian territorial waters. In the present case of DFS, it is very clear that if a foreign destination of the foreign going passenger, the passenger also acts as a carrier and the goods are appropriated outside India. In view thereof, it is clear that the decisions relied upon by the petitioner are misplaced, have no relevance to the facts of the present PIL and therefore cannot be relied upon in the context of the business undertaken by the answering respondent no.3.
In view of above discussion, we find that exemption under GST on goods supplied to and from DFS is rightly conferred and the claims of any accumulated unutilized ITC are refundable. The petition is devoid of merit and the same deserves to be dismissed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
