Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s Acco Logistics and Forwarding, filed a refund application on 12.02.2024 which was sanctioned by the adjudicating authority on 21.03.2024 for Rs.8,83,232/-. The department appealed this order on 16.08.2024, and the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal on 27.02.2025, setting aside the refund. The petitioner challenged this appellate order before the High Court. The court found that the appellate authority had passed a non-speaking order without recording any findings on the documentary evidence submitted by the petitioner. The court held that the order violated principles of natural justice and was unsustainable. Consequently, the court quashed the appellate order and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration, directing that the petitioner be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The court also directed that the refund amount, if already disbursed, should not be recovered pending fresh adjudication.
Headnote
A) GST - Refund - Speaking Order - Section 54, 107 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Appellate authority set aside refund sanction order without considering documentary evidence - Held that the impugned order is non-speaking and violative of principles of natural justice - Matter remanded for fresh consideration (Paras 5-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellate authority's order setting aside the refund sanction without recording any findings on documentary evidence is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court quashed the appellate order dated 27.02.2025 and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration, directing that the petitioner be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The court also directed that if the refund amount has already been disbursed, it shall not be recovered pending fresh adjudication.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- speaking order requirement
- appellate authority's duty to consider evidence
- refund under CGST Act
