- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Rejection of IGST refund Application in Light of Notification Declared Unconstitutional by Supreme Court
Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Rejection of IGST refund Application in Light of Notification Declared Unconstitutional by Supreme Court
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the orders that rejected ETC Agro Processing (India) Pvt. Ltd.’s (petitioner) application for refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) pertaining to the period from July 2017 to June 2018, while observing that the Notification No.10/2017-IGST dated 28th June, 2017, regarding ‘categories of services on which integrated tax will be payable under reverse charge mechanism under IGST Act,’ has been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
In the instant writ petition, the petitioner had sought a direction from the Court to the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax (WBGST) authority for the refund of the IGST amount already paid, pursuant to the Entry No.10 of Notification No.10/2017-IGST dated 28th June, 2017. The refund was denied to the petitioner on the grounds of alleged limitation.
The petitioner relied on a decision of the Gujarat High Court in ETC Agro Processing (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. Union of India, which pertained to the petitioner’s own case. The petitioner also stated that impugned notification has been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
The single judge Justice Md. Nizamuddin noted that the Additional Government Pleader, did not dispute the factual and legal position that the impugned notification had already been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the Court acknowledged that the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the petitioner's own case had not been stayed or interfered with by any higher forum till date.
Consequently, the Court remanded the matter back to the authorities to reconsider and make a fresh decision regarding the grant of refund to the petitioner based on merit.