2018 (10) TMI 1619 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI – Interest on delayed refund – tax paid in respect of exported goods – section 16 of IGST Act – mismatch of invoices – Held that:- The Respondents state that there is an Invoices mismatch in respect of the refund sought. Thus, leading to delay in passing the refund. This is disputed by the Petitioner. Besides, the Circulars and FAQ mentioned, inter alia, deal with grant of refund in spite of Invoices mismatch/ error, as indicated by SB005. The above Circular/ FAQ does not deal with grant of interest even for the period when there Invoice mismatched/ error. Thus, the Circular/FAQ does not decide the issue, but would require deeper consideration.
–
The issue of grant of interest for delaying refund does requires factual determination as to the type of Invoices mismatch, who was responsible for the same and who, if any, and how, was the same corrected. This exercise would be best done by the adjudicating authorities under the Act after hea
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
interest on the amount of ₹ 52.52 Crores of refund already granted to it as well as the refund of the balance amount of ₹ 2.35 Crores together with interest thereon. It is the Petitioner's case that they are not only entitled to refund of tax paid but also interest thereon as provided under Section 56 of the Act, from the expiry of 60 days of filing of the shipping bills, in whch the refund is claimed. 3. As against the above, it is the Respondents' case, as indicated in affidavit in reply dated 15th October, 2018 of Mr. Balmukund Agarwal, the Asstt. Commissioner of Customs that, there is a invoice mismatch/ error in this case. This has resulted in delay in refunding of the amount of ₹ 52.52 Crores. Thus, no interest in the present facts, is payable by the Revenue for the delay in granting the refund as the same is on account of the Petitioner. 4. Mr. Shah, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, disputes the fact that there is any invoice mismatch. Our
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
of interest even for the period when there Invoice mismatched/ error. Thus, the Circular/FAQ does not decide the issue, but would require deeper consideration. 6. In these circumstances, we are of the view that, the issue of grant of interest for delaying refund does requires factual determination as to the type of Invoices mismatch, who was responsible for the same and who, if any, and how, was the same corrected. This exercise would be best done by the adjudicating authorities under the Act after hearing the parties. 7. Therefore, we do not entertain this Petition. However, we direct the Petitioner to file a representation to the Adjudicating Authority, who would consider the same and after hearing the Petitioner, pass a speaking order, dealing with the Petitioner's contention. 8. Normally, this representation would have been made to the deponent of the affidavit in reply i.e. Mr. Balmukund Agarwal, Asstt. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva, Navi Mumbai. However, in the affida
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =