Gujarat High Court
M/S Amit Cotton Industries Throu ... vs Principal Commissioner Of Customs on 20 December, 2018
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani, A. P. Thaker
C/SCA/20126/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20126 of 2018
==========================================================
M/S AMIT COTTON INDUSTRIES THROU PARTNER, VELJIBHAI
VIRJIBHAI RANIPA
Versus
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR D K TRIVEDI(5283) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
and
HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 20/12/2018
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. The learned advocate for the petitioner has tendered a draft amendment. The amendment is allowed in terms of the draft. The same shall be carried out forthwith.
2. The learned advocate for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to the provisions of section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 which makes a provision for "Zero rated supply". It was submitted that under sub-section (3) thereof, a registered person making zero rated supply is eligible to claim refund as provided therein. It was submitted that the provision for refund of integrated tax paid on goods exported out of India is made under rule 96 of the Central Goods and services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as "the rules"). It was submitted that all the Page 1 of 2 C/SCA/20126/2018 ORDER requirements for claiming refund under the said rule have been fulfilled by the petitioner. Referring to sub-rule (4) of rule 96 of the rules, it was submitted that the claim for refund can be withheld only in the two eventualities mentioned therein, none of which are attracted in the present case. Reference was made to the e-mail dated 28.11.2018 issued by the IGST Section, Customs House, Mundra drawing the attention of the petitioner to the Board Circular No.37/2018-Customs dated 9.8.2018 wherein it is clearly mentioned that by declaring drawback claim serial number suffixed with A or C, the exporters consciously relinquished their IGST/ITC claim. Reference was made to Circular No.37/2018-Customs dated 9.10.2018 to submit that the same does not relate to IGST and would have no applicability to the facts of the present case. It was submitted that in any case, the petitioner has already returned back the differential drawback amount, and hence, there is no impediment in the way of the respondents in granting the refund to the petitioner.
2. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, Issue Notice returnable on 24th January, 2019.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) Z.G. SHAIKH Page 2 of 2