1. Learned advocate for the petitioner has tendered a draft amendment. Amendment is allowed in terms of the draft. The same shall be carried out forthwith.

2. Mr. Abhishek A. Rastogi, learned advocate with Mr. Bhavesh B. Chokshi and Mr. Pratyush Saha, learned advocates for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to the provisions of rule 92 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 and more particularly, to sub-rule(3) thereof to point out the procedure which the proper officer is required to follow. It was submitted that the proper officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under sub-rule(3) of rule 92 and has gone directly to rule 93 of the said rules and re- credited the amount to the electronic credit ledger. The attention of the court was invited to sub-rule (3) of rule 89 of the said rules to submit that the same would apply only where the application relates to refund of input tax credit which is not so in the present case. It was submitted that therefore, the question of recrediting the amount would not arise.

3. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, issue notice, returnable on 16.10.2019.

4. Direct service, is permitted.