Bombay High Court Remands IGST Refund Dispute for Reconsideration Following Omission of Rule 96(10)
The Bombay High Court recently delivered a significant order in the case of Kelvion India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors., addressing the complexities surrounding the refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and the retrospective applicability of legal amendments. The Court set aside previous rejection orders and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision, specifically directing them to consider the impact of the omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy originated from the business operations of the assessee, a manufacturer and exporter of heat exchangers and allied products. To facilitate its manufacturing process, the assessee imported raw materials utilizing the "Advance Authorisation" scheme. This scheme allowed the assessee to claim exemptions from Basic Customs Duty and IGST under specific customs notifications dated 1 April 2015 and 13 October 2017.
Subsequently, the assessee utilized these imported materials to produce finished goods, which were then exported. For the period spanning June 2019 to December 2019, the assessee executed these exports upon payment of IGST and subsequently claimed a refund under the provisions of the IGST Act, 2017.