High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

Delhi High Court Sets Precedent: Refund Application Cannot Be Ignored Due to Deficiency Memo, Rules in Favor of National Internet Exchange of India

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant decision, the Delhi High Court reiterating that an application for refund cannot be deemed invalid solely based on a deficiency memo issued by the proper officer. The court’s decision came in response to a writ petition filed by the National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI), challenging the rejection of their refund claim of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) by the Department of Trade and Taxes.

Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan delivered the judgment, emphasizing that if an application for refund is complete and accompanied by the necessary documentary evidence, it cannot be ignored even if the proper officer seeks further clarifications or additional documents. The court held that the mere issuance of a deficiency memo does not render the application “non est,” and the taxpayer’s compliance with the prescribed form and manner of filing is sufficient to stop the period of limitation.

The court referred to its earlier decision in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India & Ors., where a similar interpretation was provided. The ruling reaffirmed that Rule 90(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, which deals with deficiencies noted in refund applications, cannot be interpreted to invalidate applications that are otherwise complete and in accordance with the law.

“The present case is covered by the decision in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India & Ors. And thus, it is not necessary to examine the broader challenge to the vires of Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules or paragraph 12 of the impugned Circular,” stated Mr. Ramachandran, senior standing counsel for the Revenue.

The court allowed NIXI’s petition, setting aside the impugned order rejecting the refund application based on the ground of limitation. The case has now been restored for fresh consideration by the proper officer on its merits.

This judgment holds significance as it clarifies the procedural aspect of refund applications under the GST regime and underscores the principle that an application for refund cannot be dismissed solely due to deficiencies, as long as the prescribed form and documentary evidence are furnished. The decision provides relief to taxpayers by preventing their refund claims from being invalidated on technical grounds, ultimately safeguarding their rights and interests.

Date of Decision: 9 August 2023

NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA  vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 

Latest Legal News