Page 120 - GSTL_2nd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 1

22 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 35
8. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie
observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicants on bail. The ap-
plication is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.
Direct service is permitted.

________

2020 (35) G.S.T.L. 22 (Del.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vipin Sanghi and Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
TMA INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.

Versus
UNION OF INDIA
W.P. (C) No. 2694 of 2019, decided on 26-11-2019
Refund - IGST on exports during transitional period - Benefit claimed
inadvertently under wrong provision as there was lack of clarity on refund -
Wrong input given at time of claiming drawback - Cost analysis showing that
denial of refund would cause severe financial crunch to exporters - HELD :
Such inadvertent and unintentional error could not deprive exporter their val-
uable right of refund of IGST paid on exports - Cardinal rule is that taxes
should not be exported - Concept of zero-rated exports achieves this objective -
Exporter was victim of technical glitches due to confusion during transitional
phase, and they could not be assumed to have intentionally decided to claim
duty drawback and forego IGST refund - Before issuing final directions, De-
partment directed to verify extent of duty drawback availed by exporter and
duty drawback/Cenvat credit component in exports. [paras 14, 15, 16]
Refund - IGST on exports - Exporters would not voluntarily opt for
drawback claim under Column A of Notification No. 131/2016-Cus. (N.T.) at
cost of foregoing IGST paid on exports - Where duty drawback rates under
Columns A and B were same, exporters would receive drawback amount even
if they mentioned “B” in their shipping bills instead of “A” for claiming
drawback. - Since the condition for not claiming IGST refund is not applicable to cases
where duty drawback has been claimed under Column B, exporters would have received
IGST refund also on mentioning “B”. Therefore, exporters did not have any benefit in
claiming drawback under Column A. It is not pointed out by the Respondents that the
Petitioners derived any undue advantage by their aforesaid mistake. On the contrary, it
would result in causing loss for the value of the IGST paid on exports. By way of illustra-
tion, we take note of one such instance as pointed out by Mr. Bansal that if Steel Strips
(HSN 7211) are exported then whether duty drawback is claimed under Column A or
Column B, the rate is 2%. However, rate of IGST on the said export is 18%. In such a
situation under no circumstances it can be assumed that the exporters intentionally de-
cided to claim duty drawback should forego IGST refund. Besides, if the petitioners have
claimed and received only the Customs duty portion of the drawback and element of
IGST (earlier Central Excise Duty and Service Tax) was not included in the drawback
rate, granting of IGST refund would not result in double neutralisation of input taxes.

GST LAW TIMES  2nd April 2020  184