Case Details: Nitin v. Union of India - [2023] 157 taxmann.com 543 (Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Vibhu Bakhru & Amit Mahajan, JJ.
- Virendra Kumar, Adv. for the Petitioner.
- Shekhar Vyas, Neha Warrier, Archana Surve, Anurag Ojha, Vipul Kumar & Subham Kumar, Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, being a transporter, was engaged to transport dried areca nuts from Karnataka to New Delhi in a truck. The petitioner’s vehicle was intercepted and driver produced necessary papers but failed to produce E-way bill. The amount of tax, penalty and fine, as quantified by GST Authorities, had been paid twice once by petitioner and then by supplier. It filed writ petition demanding refund of amount of tax and penalty which had been paid twice.
High Court Held
The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner paid the quantified amount of tax penalty and fine as his vehicle had been detained. There was merit in contention that petitioner would be entitled for refund since petitioner was not supplier of goods but was engaged in transporting same. Since the amount of tax, penalty and fine quantified in GST, could not be collected twice over, revenue was required to refund same.
However, there was no option available in portal for petitioner to apply for a refund online. Therefore, the Court allowed petitioner to make an application for refund manually to revenue and revenue was directed to process same.
The post HC Directed Dept. to Refund Amount Since Tax & Penalty During Detention Could Not Be Collected Twice appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
