If the refund claim has been purportedly rejected and the order of re-credit has also been passed, why has it not been re-credited to the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner?
Section 54 of the CGST Act — Refund –- The petitioner challenged refund rejection order dated 21.06.2018, which is the order for re- credit of the amount to cash or credit ledger on rejection of refund claim in Form GST PMT 03. The counsel for the petitioner submits that till date re-credit of the ITC has not been made to its electronic credit ledger though apparently refund claim has been rejected. The respondent counsel submitted that there is no specific technical glitch in the portal. The court asked counsel for the Respondent State, who has not been able to explain the purport of the order. The court observed that considerable court's time has been consumed in trying to unravel the purport of the order. If the refund claim has been purportedly rejected and the order of re-credit has also been passed in Form GST PMT 03, why has it not been re-credited to the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner? The counsel for the respondent State sought one week time to resolve the issue.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court listed the matter on 20.04.2021.
If the refund claim has been purportedly rejected and the order of re-credit has also been passed, why has it not been re-credited to the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner?
Section 54 of the CGST Act — Refund –- The petitioner challenged refund rejection order dated 21.06.2018, which is the order for re- credit of the amount to cash or credit ledger on rejection of refund claim in Form GST PMT 03. The counsel for the petitioner submits that till date re-credit of the ITC has not been made to its electronic credit ledger though apparently refund claim has been rejected. The respondent counsel submitted that there is no specific technical glitch in the portal. The court asked counsel for the Respondent State, who has not been able to explain the purport of the order. The court observed that considerable court's time has been consumed in trying to unravel the purport of the order. If the refund claim has been purportedly rejected and the order of re-credit has also been passed in Form GST PMT 03, why has it not been re-credited to the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner? The counsel for the respondent State sought one week time to resolve the issue.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court listed the matter on 20.04.2021.