Facts of the Case

Jwala Energy Resources Private Limited, having its registered office at Visakhapatnam and GSTIN 37AADCJ2112L1ZP, represented by its authorised signatory, filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati challenging an order dated 22.08.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner-SGST, Visakhapatnam Division. The petitioner sought a mandamus declaring the impugned order unconstitutional and violative of natural justice, and a consequential direction to refund Rs.68,36,372/- deposited as IGST on import ocean freight, paid under protest on 12.06.2019, along with interest @6% p.a. from the date of payment. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner also moved an interlocutory application under Section 151 CPC seeking an interim refund pending disposal. The matter was heard by a Division Bench on 18.10.2023.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the order dated 22.08.2023 withholding refund of IGST paid under protest on import ocean freight was unconstitutional, arbitrary, and violative of natural justice.
  2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to an immediate refund of Rs.68,36,372/- with interest, or whether it must first comply with the procedural requirement of Form GST RFD-03 under Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner contended that the impugned order was unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.
  • It argued that the amount of Rs.68,36,372/- had been deposited as IGST on import ocean freight under protest on 12.06.2019, and was therefore refundable with interest at 6% per annum from that date.
  • Pending final disposal, the petitioner sought an interim direction under Section 151 CPC compelling the respondents to refund the amount forthwith.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Government Pleader, appearing on instructions, did not defend the impugned order on merits but instead produced a format of Form GST-RFD-03 under Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules.
  • The Department represented that if the petitioner responded to the particulars required under Form GST-RFD-03, it was ready to process the refund claim and pass appropriate orders expeditiously.

Court Order/Findings

  • Recording the respective submissions, the Bench noted that the petitioner's counsel agreed to respond to Form GST-RFD-03 and requested that the writ petition be closed on that basis.
  • The Court closed the writ petition with a direction that the petitioner respond to Form GST-RFD-03 within two weeks, following which the Assistant Commissioner-SGST would consider the response, grant a hearing, and pass an appropriate order within a further two weeks.
  • No costs were awarded, and pending interlocutory applications stood closed as a sequel to the disposal.

Important Clarification

  • Refund claims of IGST paid under protest on ocean freight are procedurally routed through Form GST-RFD-03 under Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules, which requires the claimant to furnish specified particulars before the refund is processed.
  • Where the Department is willing to process a refund on compliance with this procedural form, courts will often close the writ petition on a time-bound compliance schedule rather than adjudicating the underlying entitlement on merits.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction invoked to challenge the refund-related order.
  • Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 — governs the procedure for Form GST-RFD-03, used to seek clarification/deficiency memo on a refund application.
  • Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — invoked for interim relief pending disposal of the writ petition.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was closed on terms that gave the petitioner a clear, time-bound procedural pathway to pursue its IGST refund claim, without either side conceding entitlement on merits. This is best read as disposed of with directions, substantially in favour of the Assessee, since the Department committed to processing the refund expeditiously once the prescribed form was completed.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Amaravati)
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No.27026 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu
  • Decision Date: 18.10.2023
  • Disposal Nature: Closed with direction for petitioner to respond to Form GST RFD-03 and department to process refund

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.