Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 — Refund —- The petitioner exported consignments of goods and claimed duty drawback under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962. Additionally, the petitioner claimed refund of ITC. The petitioner submitted that the exports effected by the petitioner are "zero rated supply" and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to refund of unutilized input tax credit under Section 16(3)(a) of the Act. Since on the same export, the petitioner has claimed duty drawback, the refund of unutilized input tax credit is being denied. The court observed that refund of ITC under Section 16(3) r/w Section 54 and Rules 89 and 96 cannot be denied, merely because the petitioner has claimed duty drawback. The expression ‘CENVAT Facility’ in Column Nos.4 & 5 of the Schedule to the Notification No.131/2016-Cus (N.T) dated 31.10.2016 is to be read as ‘Input Tax Facility’ under the respective enactments. Therefore, there is no merit in the stand of the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief. Paragraph No.2.5 of Circular No.37/2018-Cus, dated 09.10.2018 cannot be pressed to deny legitimate export incentive as same is not sanctioned under law. Only higher rate of drawback cannot be claimed exports covered by shipping bills, where for such exports, the refund of IGST is claimed if two rates are then. The decision of the Gujarat High Court in Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union of India dated 15.12.2020, deals with similar situation. The appeal of the Union of India against the said order has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court confirming the order dated 15.12.2020.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the Petition and directed the respondents to scrutinize the refund claims filed by the petitioner under Section 16(3) and refund the same together with applicable interest, within a period of three months.