GST - Andhra Pradesh High Court: Issue of refund of ocean freight tax - Held that since such refunds fall under mistake of law principles, timelines under Section 54 is not applicable [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
20-Aug-2025 22:57:39
Order date:14 Aug 2025
Parties: M/s Louis Dreyfus Company Pvt. Ltd. V. Union of India & Ors.
Facts -
- The petitioner, an importer, had paid GST under reverse charge on ocean freight for CIF contracts pursuant to Notifications 8/2017 and 10/2017. The Supreme Court in Mohit Minerals (2022) struck down the levy.
- The petitioner applied for refunds in March 2023, but the adjudicating authority rejected them as time-barred under Section 54 of the CGST Act, which decision was confirmed in appeal. The petitioner challenged these orders before the High Court.
Issue -
- Whether refund of GST paid under an invalid levy can be denied on the ground of limitation under Section 54 of the CGST Act?
Order -
- The division bench of the Hon’ble high court held that amounts collected under an unconstitutional or invalid levy are not “tax” within the meaning of Article 265, and therefore refund of such payments cannot be regulated strictly by Section 54 of the CGST Act.
- It emphasized that judicial declarations of invalidity operate retrospectively, unless expressly limited by the Court; hence Mohit Minerals applied even to pre-2022 payments.
- The Court relied on Bhailal Bhai (SC) and Gujarat HC decisions (Comsol, Binani Cement) to conclude that such refunds fall under mistake of law principles, where limitation under Section 54 is not applicable.
- Accordingly, the rejection orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to consider the refund claims on merits, without raising limitation objections, within four weeks.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation