GST Refund Application Cannot Be Rejected Solely on Ground That It Was Not Submitted Electronically | HC

Case Details: AVT MC Cormic Ingredients (P.) Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner Central Tax & Central Excise - [2025] 173 taxmann.com 545 (Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Bechu Kurian Thomas, J.
• A. Kumar, Sr. Adv., P.J. Anil Kumar for the Appellant.
• G. Mini, P.S. Sree Prasad & Job Abraham, Advs. for the Petitioner.
• Sreelal N. Warrier, SC & P. G. Jayashankar, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, an exporter of spices, herbs, and flavors, submitted letters of undertaking without payment of integrated tax and claimed a refund of unutilized ITC. For the period when attempts were made to file a refund application in the electronic mode, an error was displayed. Thus, the petitioner filed a manual application for refund. Aggrieved by the manual application, the department rejected the refund application. The department contended that the application for refund filed manually cannot be accepted and processed in view of Rule 89 (1) of the CGST Rules read with Section 54 of the CGST Act. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed a writ petition.

High Court Held

The High Court held that Rule 89 of the CGST Rules describes that a person claiming refund of any tax, interest or penalty may file an application electronically in Form GST RFD-01 through the common portal. However, Rule 97A of the CGST Rules, stipulates that, notwithstanding anything contained in Chapter X, any application/intimation, notice, order or certificate referred to in that chapter shall include manual filing as well. Both electronic applications as well as manual applications are permitted to be filed. If electronic application for refund is the only mode contemplated, the provisions of Rule 97A would become redundant and even a dead letter. Such an interpretation cannot be adopted. In view of Rule 97A of the CGST Rules, the order rejecting the petitioner’s application for refund solely on the ground that it was not submitted electronically is perverse and legally erroneous.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Laxmi Organic Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2021 SCC Online Bom. 10539/[2021] 133 taxmann.com 65/89 GST 463/63 GSTL 452 (Bombay)] (para 7), followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Laxmi Organic Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2021] 133 taxmann.com 65/[2022] 89 GST 463/63 GSTL 452 (Bombay) (para 7).