Disposed

M/S Eastland Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Customs and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC17 Nov 2021WP(C)/5185/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought refund of IGST and interest for delay. Court noted department initiated refund but bank details were rejected by system. Ordered petitioner's representative to visit customs and resolve issues. Interest claim deferred as amount not disclosed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to visit customs office to resolve refund issue deferred interest claim due to undisclosed refund amount

M/S Eastland Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. Vs Principal… — Banking and Recovery | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010152442021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5185/2021

¶5

M/S EASTLAND SWITCHGEARS PVT. LTD.

¶6

A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT SWAIKA CENTRE, 4A, POLLOCK STREET, KOLKATA WEST BENGAL 700001

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND 3 ORS. NORTH EAST REGION, SHILLONG CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE, HAVING HIS OFFICE AT 110, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, SHILLONG793001, MEGHALAYA

¶9

2:THE SUPERINTENDENT LAND CUSTOMS STATION HATISAR OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER DHUBRI CUSTOMS DIVISION 783375

¶10

3:THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER

¶11

LAND CUSTOMS STATION HATISAR DHUBRI CUSTOMS DIVISION 783375

¶12

4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS LAND CUSTOMS STATION HATISAR DHUBRI CUSTOMS DIVISION 78337

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P DAS

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CUSTOMS

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

17.11.2021

¶19

Heard Mr. A Kanodia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SC Keyal, learned counsel for the respondents in the Customs Department, Government of Assam.

¶20

This writ petition is instituted seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to process and refund the claim of IGST of the petitioner along with applicable interest for the delay in refunding the amount concerned.

¶21

The petitioner raises the contention that the claim for refund of IGST paid on export of goods done from Non-EDI sites have not been refunded. It is also contended that as per the instruction No.20/2018-Customs dated 26.11.2018 of the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the procedure for processing the IGST refund claims for exports made from NonEDI sites have been provided.

¶22

When the matter was taken up on 04.10.2021, Mr. SC Keyal, learned counsel for the Customs Department had made a statement that as required under the procedure, the export data of the petitioner assessee have been

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

captured by using offline utilities and the matter is under process.

¶25

Today, when the matter was called upon, Mr. SC Keyal, learned counsel has produced an information under the signature of the Superintendent (Sys/STS) Customs Division, Dhubri by which it is informed that on 10.11.2021, the Customs Officer Dhubri had initiated the process to refund the required amount to the petitioner in the system, but when he entered the bank details provided by the petitioner in respect of HDFC Bank, the system showed the message ‘duplicate bank A/c in the same branch is not allowed’.

¶26

On 11.11.2021, the petitioner had provided another bank account number in the HDFC Bank, but the same problem remained. On 15.11.2021, a mail had also been sent to Saksham Seva, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Delhi to resolve the matter. On 16.11.2021, a message appeared in the PFMS Account Status of the portal which reads as ‘Rejected’.

¶27

In the circumstances, we are of the view that as the Department had taken the necessary initiative to make the refund and the refund could not be effected as because the account provided by the petitioner were not acceptable by the system in the department, we provide that a representative of the petitioner would visit the office of the Customs Division, Dhubri and sort out the matter and the Customs Department may also explore any other alternative means for making the payment of the amount in consultation with the representative of the petitioner.

¶28

Page No.# 4/4

¶29

As regards the interest portion, we are unaware of the amount the Department intends to pay to the petitioner as because the amount sought to be refunded is not disclosed to the petitioner. If at all, any further grievance still remains on the interest aspect, the petitioner is at liberty to approach again.

¶30

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

M/S Eastland Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Customs and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Eastland Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Customs and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tarulata Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Swell Alom Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Krishna Kanta Pegu Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mozibar Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Ramen Kr Sarma and 41 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Mozammel Hoque Vs Mozibar Rahman and 6 Ors.