Order Date – 24 November 2023

Parties: Vaishnodevi Advisory Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dy. Commissioner Central Goods & Services Tax & Central Excise, Siliguri Divn. & Ors.

Facts – 

• The Petitioner, Vaishnodevi Advisory Pvt. Ltd., had applied for refund of accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) relating to the period January 2021-March 2021 being an exporter on account of export of goods without payment of tax through common portal.
• Though the refunds were sanctioned and reflected in common portal, the respondent reviewed the order and observed that in the case 12 shipping bills which were signed and cleared by the Inspector, Custom, who is not the authorised officer in terms of Section 51 of the Customs the Act, 1951 as “Turnover of Zero-rated supplies” envisaged in Rule 89 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 for the purpose of arriving at the Refund amount.
• Further alleged that in 3 bills which has been cleared by the Superintendent of Customs, without obtaining any approval from the AC/DC of Customs having jurisdiction over Hatisar LCS hence it cannot be accepted as “valid proof of export for the purpose of refund”.

Issue –

• Whether refund sanctioned can be rejected when the bills are not signed and cleared by the proper officers?

Order –

• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that signing by the officials of Custom is a mere irregularity from the side of customs department but for such irregularity the writ petition shall not be penalised when he has produced documents through online portal as well as physical mode for clearance of goods exported under Section 51 of the Customs Act, 1962. Which had been received by the petitioner at the time of export and the goods have been actually exported out of India to its destination successfully.
• The applicant has uploaded the documents which are required by the Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST dated 18/11/2019. Only mistake was made by the petitioner is that he had uploaded the quadruplicate copy of the shipping bills which was countersigned by the Inspector of Customs. 
• Subsequently, when it came to know about the anomalies, the petitioner has submitted the triplicate copy which was countersigned by the Superintendent of Customs before the Authority for consideration but without considering the same the respondent no. 2, has filed the appeal against the sanctioned order of refund issued by the adjudicating officer without verifying the said shipping bills from the Customs Department. Appellate authority has also not considered all these aspects while coming to a final conclusion. 
• Accordingly, judgement and order dated 12.12.2022 passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 (2) of the GST Act is set aside. The respondent is directed to reconsider the issue after thorough scrutiny of documents and verification of shipping bills submitted by the petitioner.