HC Directs Amendment of Shipping Bill to Correct GSTIN and Enable IGST Refund

GST • News • Case Chronicles

correction of GSTIN
Case Details: Auracare Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Complex (2025) 29 Centax 408 (Guj.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Bhargav D. Karia & D.N. Ray, JJ.
  • Shri Darshan R Patel, Adv. for the Petitioner.
  • MS Hardika Vyas for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a registered exporter under the GST regime, procured raw materials and effected an export of goods. While filing the shipping bill details on the ICEGATE portal at the time of export, the petitioner inadvertently entered the GSTIN of its sister concern, which had a similar name. This clerical error led to the shipping bill being generated in the name of the sister concern, despite the export being undertaken by the petitioner. Due to this mismatch between the shipping bill and the GST returns filed by the petitioner under Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-3B, the claim for refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid on the export was rejected by the revenue. Upon receiving the rejection, the petitioner submitted a written representation requesting the correction of the shipping bill details in the EDI system to reflect the correct GSTIN. In response, the revenue acknowledged that the petitioner had indeed erroneously entered the GSTIN of its sister concern. The authority further verified and confirmed that the petitioner was the actual exporter by cross-checking the relevant GST returns. However, the revenue stated that rectification in the EDI system could not be carried out once the export was completed, and accordingly, the refund could not be granted. Consequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Gujarat High Court seeking directions for necessary amendments in the EDI system and the GST portal to enable the release of the IGST refund.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the petitioner’s inadvertent error, duly verified and substantiated through GST returns, could not justify denial of refund. The Court directed the revenue to amend the shipping bill in the EDI system by entering the correct GSTIN of the petitioner and to make corresponding changes on the GST portal. The entire process, including refund disbursal, was to be completed within twelve weeks.

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
Writ Against Section 74 Consolidated GST Order Not Maintainable | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 5, 2025

HC Quashes GST Demand Order for Denial of Hearing | Fresh Notice Directed

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 4, 2025

Recovery During GST Search Without SCN Held Illegal—Refund with Interest Ordered | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 4, 2025

Copy of CGST (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2025

GST • News • Statutory Scope

November 3, 2025

GSTN Launches ‘Import of Goods’ Module in IMS from Oct 2025

GST • News • Statutory Scope

November 1, 2025

GSTN Bars Filing of GST Returns Beyond 3 Years From Due Date

GST • News • Statutory Scope

October 31, 2025

CBIC Defines Officer Jurisdiction and Monetary Limits for SCNs and Orders Under CGST Act

GST • News • Statutory Scope

October 30, 2025

HC Quashes ITC Demand Order Passed Without Hearing After GST Cancellation

GST • News • Case Chronicles

October 29, 2025

HC Dismisses Writ for Delay in Challenging Order Before Filing Refund Claim

GST • News • Case Chronicles

October 28, 2025

HC Remands Case Over Inconsistent Refund Orders Passed on Similar Facts

GST • News • Case Chronicles

October 28, 2025