Mg Global vs. Directorate General Of Analytics And Risk Management And Others
(Delhi High Court, Delhi)

Case Law
Petitioner / Applicant
Mg Global
Respondent
Directorate General Of Analytics And Risk Management And Others
Court
Delhi High Court
State
Delhi
Date
Sep 13, 2022
Order No.
W.P.(C) 5708/2022
TR Citation
2022 (9) TR 6401
Related HSN Chapter/s
N/A
Related HSN Code
N/A

ORDER

1. This writ petition was, in the first instance, placed before the Court on 06.04.2022, when we had made the following observations:

“2. The petitioner is a proprietorship concern.

3. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that it was not accorded the refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and duty drawback, only on the ground that it was categorised as a “risky exporter”.

3. It is averred by Mr Rajat Mittal, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, that in accordance with the Standard Operating Procedure [in short “SOP”] contained in the Central Board of Excise and Customs’ [CBEC] Circular No.131/1/2020-GST, while carrying forward the export consignments/shipments, the petitioner was subjected to an examination, in which it is found to be clear.

3.1 It appears that the aforementioned CBEC‟s circular has been further amended on 20.05.2020.

4. Mr Aditya Singla, who appears on behalf of petitioner, says that the inquiry is not complete. For this purpose, Mr Singla has drawn our attention to the documents appended on pages 43 and 47 of the case file.

4.1 Mr Mittal, however, contends to the contrary.

5. Mr Singla will ascertain, as to what is missing, in terms of the documents that the petitioner has to submit.”

2. The matter was, thereafter, taken up on 02.05.2022, when the counsel for the respondents i.e., Mr Aditya Singla sought time to place the counter-affidavit filed in the matter, on record of the Court.

3. We are informed, that the counter-affidavit, as well as rejoinder filed by the petitioner, is on record.

4. Mr Singla says that in the counter-affidavit, the respondents had adverted to three queries, which appear to have been answered by the petitioner, in the rejoinder.

4.1 Therefore, it is Mr Singla’s contention, that if a direction is issued for the appearance of the petitioner before the concerned officer, the grievance of the petitioner may get redressed.

5. To be noted, the substantive prayers made in the writ petition are the following:

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction or order directing the Respondent No. 1 to issue No Objection Certificate in terms of the Standard Operating Procedure prescribed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs vide Circular No.131/1/2020-GST dated 23.01.2020 as further modified via fresh CBIC Circular 20/16/07/2020-GST dated 20.05.2020;

ii) To issue consequent direction to the Respondent authorities to grant refund of the IGST to the Petitioner.”

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner says, that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the respondents are directed to treat the writ petition as a representation, and determine afresh, as to whether the petitioner falls in the category of “risky exporter.”

6.1 It is in this context, that the petitioner has sought relief in terms of prayer clause (i).

7. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the jurisdictional authority in the matter is respondent no. 3/Commissioner, Central Tax (Delhi West) [in short “Commissioner”].

8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The respondent no.3/Commissioner will treat the writ petition as a representation. The said respondent will also examine the stand taken by the petitioner, in its rejoinder.

(ii) For this purpose, respondent no.3/Commissioner will afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorized representative (AR) of the petitioner.

(iii) The AR of the petitioner will appear before the respondent no.3/Commissioner on 23.09.2022, at 11:00 AM.

(iv) The respondent no.3/Commissioner will, thereafter, pass a speaking order, a copy of which would be furnished to the petitioner.

(v) In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent no.3/Commissioner, it will have liberty to assail the same, albeit as per law.

9. List the matter for compliance on 23.11.2022.

10. Needless to add, the respondent no.3/Commissioner will act with due expedition.

11. The entire exercise will be completed no later than 13.10.2022.

Please Wait
  • Home
  • /
  • caselaw
  • /
  • mg global vs directorate general of analytics and risk management and others delhi high court

BUSY is a simple, yet powerful GST / VAT compliant Business Accounting Software that has everything you need to grow your business.

phone Sales & Support:

+91 82 82 82 82 82
+91 11 - 4096 4096