- within Compliance topic(s)
- with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy and Law Firm industries
The Orissa High Court has observed that the nature of refund claim in a case where tax was mistakenly paid twice, once by utilizing credit ledger and second time though cash, falls within the fold of Article 265 of the Constitution of India, and not under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017.
According to the Court, thus, the rejection of application for refund on the anvil of sub-section (1) of Section 54 read with Clause (h) of Paragraph (2) of Explanation appended thereto (limitation of 2 years) is inapplicable.
It was held that refund claimed in respect of tax paid erroneously or under mistaken notion cannot be denied solely on the ground of limitation stipulated in Section 54.
The High Court in Rajendra Narayan Mohanty v. Joint Commissioner [TS 95 HC (ORI) 2026 GST] also noted that Order passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax in consideration of application for refund in Form GST RFD-01, would not be comprehended within the expression 'as a consequence of judgment, decree, order or direction of the Appellate Authority, Appellate Tribunal or any Court'.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
