#5 $ * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 4205/2020 JIAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Jain, Advocate with Mr. Virag Tiwari and Mr. Ramashish, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Addl. Standing Counsel for GNCTD. % Date of Decision: 22nd July, 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) CM APPL. 15103/2020 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P. (C) 4205/2020 1. petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to respondent to grant refund of Rs.9,12,893/- claimed under Section 54 of Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as DGST Act ) W.P. (C) 4205/2020 Page 1 of 5 for month of August, 2019 as well as grant of interest in accordance with Section 56 of DGST/CGST Act. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner states that in accordance with Section 54(6) of DGST Act read with Rule 91(2) of Delhi Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short DGST Rules ) proper officer is required to refund at least 90% per cent of refund claimed on account of zero-rated supply of goods or services or both made by registered persons within period of seven days from date of acknowledgment issued under sub-rule (l) or sub-rule (2) of Rule 90 of DGST Rules. He states that despite period of fifteen days from date of filing of refund application having expired on 19th November, 2019, respondent has till date neither pointed out any deficiency/discrepancy in FORM GST RFD-03 nor it has issued any acknowledgement in FORM GST RFD-02. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner further states that even for refunds for months of September and November, 2017, petitioner had to file W.P.(C) No.6337/2019 and it was only thereafter Department had refunded tax along with partial interest. 5. On last two dates of hearing, Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, learned counsel for respondent had sought time to obtain instructions. He admits that there has been laxity on part of respondent in processing petitioner s application. He, however, states that formal deficiency memo will have to be issued as certain documents though annexed with writ petition had not been uploaded by petitioner along with its refund application. 6. Having heard learned counsel for parties, this Court finds that Rules 90 and 91 of CGST/DGST Rules provide complete code with regard to acknowledgement, scrutiny and grant of refund. said Rules also W.P. (C) 4205/2020 Page 2 of 5 provide strict time line for carrying out aforesaid activities. For instance, Rules 90(2) and (3) of DGST Rules states that within fifteen days from date of filing of refund application, respondent has to either point out discrepancy/deficiency in FORM GST RFD-03 or acknowledge refund application in FORM GST RFD-02. In event deficiencies are noted and communicated to applicant, then applicant would have to file fresh refund application after rectifying deficiencies. relevant portion of Rule 90 of CGST/DGST Rules is reproduced hereinbelow:- 90. Acknowledgement.- .......... (1) Where application relates to claim for refund from electronic cash ledger, acknowledgement in FORM GST RFD- 02 shall be made available to applicant through common portal electronically, clearly indicating date of filing of claim for refund and time period specified in in sub-section (7) of section 54 shall be counted from such date of filing. (2) application for refund, other than claim for refund from electronic cash ledger, shall be forwarded to proper officer who shall, within period of fifteen days of filing of said application, scrutinize application for its completeness and where application is found to be complete in terms of sub-rule (2), (3) and (4)of rule 89, acknowledgement in FORM GST RFD-02 shall be made available to applicant through common portal electronically, clearly indicating date of filing of claim for refund and time period specified in sub-section (7) of section 54 shall be counted from such date of filing. (3) Where any deficiencies are noticed, proper officer shall communicate deficiencies to applicant in FORM GST RFD- 03 through common portal electronically, requiring him to file fresh refund application after rectification of such deficiencies. W.P. (C) 4205/2020 Page 3 of 5 7. In event of default or inaction to carry out said activities within stipulated period, consequences like payment of interest are stipulated in Section 56 of CGST/DGST Act. 8. Admittedly, till date petitioner s refund application dated 4th November, 2019 has not been processed. As neither any acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 has been issued nor any deficiency memo has been issued in RFD-03 within time line of fifteen days, refund application would be presumed to be complete in all respects in accordance with sub- rule (2), (3) and (4) of Rule 89 of CGST/DGST Rules. 9. To allow respondent to issue deficiency memo today would amount to enabling Respondent to process refund application beyond statutory timelines as provided under Rule 90 of CGST Rules, referred above. This could then also be construed as rejection of petitioner s initial application for refund as petitioner would thereafter have to file fresh refund application after rectifying alleged deficiencies. This would not only delay petitioner s right to seek refund, but also impair petitioner s right to claim interest from relevant date of filing of original application for refund as provided under Rules. 10. Moreover, respondent s prayer to raise deficiency memo is hyper-technical plea as admittedly, all relevant documents have been annexed with present writ petition and respondent is satisfied about their authenticity. 11. Consequently, this Court is of view that respondent has lost right to point out any deficiency, in petitioner s refund application, at this belated stage. W.P. (C) 4205/2020 Page 4 of 5 12. Accordingly, this Court directs respondent to pay to petitioner refund along with interest in accordance with law within two weeks. 13. With aforesaid directions, present writ petition stands disposed of. 14. order be uploaded on website forthwith. Copy of order be also forwarded to learned counsel through e-mail. MANMOHAN, J SANJEEV NARULA, J JULY 22, 2020 rn W.P. (C) 4205/2020 Page 5 of 5 Jian International v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax