The petitioner is a pharmaceutical company. It took over business of another pharmaceutical company. It applied for registration in 2020 and sought refund of accumulated inverted input tax credit. It could not file refund electronically (on the portal) as it was not registered during the period in question. Accordingly, it filed manual refund application (through email). It came to be rejected. Such rejection was challenged in writ petition.
The High Court of Himachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla allowed the writ petition and set aside the refund rejection order. It held: (i) manual applications can be accepted in terms of Rule 97A of the CGST Rules; relies upon Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Laxmi Organics case and Gujarat High court in Ayana Pharma case; (ii) circular issued by the CBIC cannot override the rules; (iii) any person under section 54(1) of the CGST act can file refund application and need not be necessarily registered person; (iv) imposes costs of Rs.10,000/- on the deputy commissioner who passed the impugned order for overlooking the rules.
AMN Life Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India & ors.- CWP No.7919 of 2022-(Himachal Pradesh HC)
