''5.The issue as to whether the delay in filing the Forms could be a ground to deny refund, came up for consideration before this Court in a case of R.K.Knits Vs. Assistant Commissioner(CT) (MAD) reported in (2015) 84 VST 521(Mad), wherein, the court pointed out that admittedly, the dealers turnover relate to an export turnover that admittedly, the dealers turnover relate to an export turnover attracting zero rate and there was no taxable sales effected locally or inter-state and Section 18 of the TNVAT Act would be applicable for zero rated claim in terms of Rule 10(10) of the TNVAT Act, in its monthly returns and there was no denial of the fact that the claim has been made within the time specified under the Act. Therefore, the court held that when the Form I Return remains undisputed, there is no justification on the part of the Assistant commissioner to reject the refund claim on the ground that Form W has been filed beyond 180 days. Further, it was pointed out that the provision of Input Tax Credit being a beneficial provisions and the Act contemplates filing of monthly returns, the claim could be made therein by giving necessary details along with the Input Tax Credit refund claim and the proper course for the Assistant Commissioner would be to take up the Assessment expeditiously to consider the claim and pass order. The said decision was subsequently followed by this court in the case of FIRST GARMENT MFG., CO.,(INDIA) Vs. Assistant Commissioner(MAD) reported in (2016) 88 VST 154(Mad).
