Newby Teas Overseas Private Limited Vs Joint Commissioner (Appeals)
Date: August 3, 2022
Subject Matter
Refund rejected on grounds of limitation remanded back though Notf 13/2022-CT was not in existence at the time of rejection
Summary
The petitioner has challenged an order of the appellate authority regarding the rejection of their claim for a refund. The petitioner argues that their claim is covered by a notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. The petitioner also relies on various decisions from the Supreme Court and other High Courts. The court acknowledges that the notification was not in existence at the time of the original order and the appellate order but states that the refund in question falls within the period covered by the notification. As a result, the court sets aside the appellate order and remands the matter back to the appellate authority for a fresh order in accordance with the law, within four weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representatives. The writ petition is then disposed of with this observation and direction.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.
By this writ petition petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the appellate authority dated 20th April, 2022 arising out of the original order of rejection of the petitioner’s claim of refund in question which was rejected on the ground of limitation. Petitioner has placed a notification being No. 13/2022-Central Tax dated 5th July, 2022 issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and contends that the period pertaining to the claim of refund in question is covered by the aforesaid notification.
In support of his contention petitioner also relies on several decisions including the decision of the Supreme Court and other High Court. Though the aforesaid notification dated 5th July, 2022 was not in existence at the time of passing the impugned order of rejection of petitioner’s claim of refund or at the time of passing of the impugned order by the appellate authority but the factual and legal position remains that the refund in question pertains to the period which is covered by the aforesaid notification dated 5th July, 2022.
Considering the submission of the parties the aforesaid impugned order of the appellate authority dated 20th April, 2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the appellate authority concerned for a limited purpose of passing a fresh order in accordance with law on the refund in question which is covered by the aforesaid notification and pass an order, within four weeks from the date of communication after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representatives.
With this observation and direction this writ petition being WPA 17048 of 2022 is disposed of.