AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In the context of the relief prayed for in the writ petition, reference may be made to the order dated 21.01.2021, which reads as under:
"Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent no.2 to 4 on 30.09.2020. Rejoinder thereto have also been filed by the petitioner on 07.10.2020. Surprisingly, there is no reference in the counter affidavit to the letter dated 13.06.2020 bearing memo no. 166 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Giridih Circle,Giridih to one Sri Shiv Chandra Bhagat, State Admin (GST), Jharkhand, Ranchi on the subject as to whether the amount of I.T.C refund which was rejected has been re- credited to the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner or not. CGST has also filed an affidavit stating that the appropriate authority to address the grievance of the petitioner is the Commissioner of State Taxes, Jharkhand respondent no. 2.
Learned counsel for the respondent State is allowed 10 days' time to seek instructions and file categorical reply to annexure-11 letter dated 13.06.2020. Matter be listed on 03.02.2021. Affidavit be filed latest by 01.02.2021."
On 17.02.2021 the Goods and Service Tax Network through its Chairman was impleaded as party respondent on the basis of the averments made at para 7 and 8 in the second counter affidavit of the State that the State Tax Officer has made certain correspondences / email with the Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) in respect of re-credit of I.T.C. in the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner. GSTN has filed an affidavit on 12.03.2021, Para 6 and 7 of which are quoted here under:
That it is submitted that the petitioner falls under the State jurisdiction. Nowhere in the writ petition, the refund ARN were indicated by the petitioner, also when enquired from the GST helpdesk, though a ticket was raised, still no details of refund applications (ARN) was obtained.
Subsequently, the 6 refund ARNs details were obtained from the petitioner by GSTN vide email dated 25.02.2021. On scrutiny it was found out that the 6 refund applications were filed for refund of ITC on export of goods without payment of tax, which were manually processed by the jurisdictional officer and rejected. However, the amount of inadmissible refund was not re-credited to the ITC ledger of refund claimant as RFD-01 B form which was to be submitted by the jurisdictional officer at that time, was not submitted with complete details of order. Even if in case, there is some error in uploading RFD- 01B form at that time, GSTN has already provided RFD-01C functionality to rectify the mistakes/omissions made in RFD-01B form to the state authorities since September 2020. All new development in modules is being regularly communicated to the State authorities.
That it is further submitted that the jurisdictional officer and the state nodal officer has also been contacted by GSTN telephonically to get RFD-01B/RFD-01C form uploaded at the officer dashboard which will lead to re-credit of the amount in ITC ledger of the petitioner. The state nodal officer has assured that they are in constant touch with the officer that the required action will expeditiously be done in the matter for resolution of the issue of taxpayer/ petitioner."
Learned counsel for the GSTN submits that there is no specific technical glitch in the portal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the refund rejection order (annexure-5) dated 21.06.2018 issued by the DCST (INCH.) Giridih Circle, Giridih and annexure-6 dated 28.06.2018 issued by the DCCT (INCH.) Giridih Circle, Giridih, which is the order for re- credit of the amount to cash or credit ledger on rejection of refund claim in Form GST PMT 03. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Section 56 of the JGST Act, 2017 which relates to interest on delayed refund.
Learned counsel for the Respondent State on being specifically asked, has not been able to explain the purport of the order at Annexure-
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date re-credit of the I.T.C. has not been made to its electronic credit ledger though apparently refund claim has been rejected.
Considerable court's time has been consumed in trying to unravel the purport of the order at Annexure-5 in the light of the equivocal stand of the respondent State and the reply of the GSTN quoted above. However, because of the ambivalence on the part of the respondent State no concrete answer is yet discernable. If the refund claim has been purportedly rejected and the order of re-credit has also been passed in Form GST PMT 03 (Annexure-6), why has it not been re-credited to the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner?
Learned counsel for the respondent State seeks one week time to resolve the issue. Petitioner should cooperate in case called for. If the resolution of the instant issue is not insight within this time, we would be constrained to direct the respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 to appear on the next date to explain.
Matter be listed on 20.04.2021. Affidavit in response, if any about the outcome of the exercise be brought latest by 17.04.2021.