Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017--- Refund —- The petitioner challenged the common Order-In-Appeal dated 31.03.2022, whereby two separate appeals were dismissed. The petitioner had filed its refund application dated 11.09.2020 and dated 12.09.2020 seeking refund of the unutilized ITC. The petitioner’s applications were not processed as the supplier from whom the petitioner had purchased the goods had allegedly received fake invoices from its suppliers. The court observed that the petitioner’s refund applications have been rejected merely because of suspicion without any cogent material. There is no dispute that goods have been exported; the invoices in respect of which the petitioner claimed the ITC were raised by a registered dealer; and, there is no allegation that the petitioner has not paid the invoices, which include taxes. Thus, the applications for refund cannot be denied. The allegations of any fake credit availed by supplier cannot be a ground for rejecting the petitioner’s refund applications unless it is established that the petitioner has not received the goods or paid for them. The petitioner would be entitled to the refund of the ITC on goods that have been exported by it.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Court directed the respondents to forthwith process the petitioner’s applications for refund of the ITC including Cess. In the event the respondents are able to find material to establish the allegations regarding non-supply of any goods by the Supplier to the petitioner, it would be open for the respondents to initiate such action as may be warranted in accordance with law.