The case set up in this writ petition (civil) are as follows:
The petitioner would contend that he is a manufacturer of Polypropylene Matting and doing exports as well as domestic billing. The petitioner used to pay GST for the supplies made by them in accordance with law. Since the goods are exported out of India, the same are termed as ‘Zero Rated Supply’ in accordance with Section 16 of the IGST Act. According to the said provision, a registered person making ‘Zero Rated Supply’ has an option to claim refund in accordance with Section 16(3)(b) in a manner as to, he may supply goods or services or both, on payment of integrated tax and claim refund of such tax paid on goods or services or both supplied, in accordance with Section 54 of CGST Act, Exhibits-P3 series are the shipping bill, Commercial Invoice, Export Invoice, Export General Manifest and bill of lading. Immediately after the goods are exported, considering the shipping bills as application for refund of IGST, the Respondents have to refund the said amount to the petitioner. But till date the said IGST has not been refunded to the petitioner for no fault of the petitioner. Despite repeated follow-up with the respondents till date, the amount of refund is not paid to the petitioner. It is very pertinent to note that the respondents had refunded the eligible refund amounts of the succeeding months without any demur.
2. In the light of these averments and contentions, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition (civil) with the following prayers:
Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 3rd respondent to sanction and refund the amount of ₹ 4,27,500/- (Rs. Four Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) of IGST paid by the petitioner for the goods exported from India, ie, ‘Zero Rated Supplies’ made vide Exhibit P2(a) shipping bill within a time limit fixed by this Court.
3. Heard Sri.P.S. Soman Pulladan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P. Vijayakumar, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for R1, Union of India, and Sri. Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for R2 to R5.
4. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case as disclosed in the pleadings and materials on record, it is ordered that the 3rd respondent or the competent authority of the respondents will take up the claim of the petitioner for grant of refund as referred to in Ext.P5 and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner will take a considered decision thereon without much delay, preferably within a period of 3 to 4 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of.