CGST Compensation Cess Refund—Tata Steel vs Jharkhand | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

CGST compensation cess refund
Case Details: TATA Steel Ltd. versus State of Jharkhand (2025) 29 Centax 152 (Jhar.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ. & Deepak Roshan, J.
  • Shri Salona Mittal & Ms Amrita Singh, Advs. for the Petitioner.
  • S/Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, Sr. Adv. & Aditya Kumar, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee had paid Compensation Cess under the provisions of the CGST Act. After making the payment, the assessee filed an application for a refund of the paid cess, submitting the required documents as per the statutory requirements. The department, after reviewing the refund application, issued a show cause notice proposing to reject the refund. The reasons for the proposed rejection included the non-furnishing of a receipt of payment, proof of export, declaration of non-prosecution, and certain other documents. In response, the assessee filed a detailed reply, asserting that the required documents had either already been submitted or were not necessary under the legal framework. Despite this, the department rejected the refund application, maintaining the same grounds mentioned in the show cause notice. The assessee then filed an appeal against this rejection. However, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision to reject the refund. Consequently, the assessee filed a petition before the Jharkhand High Court.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble High Court held that the rejection of the refund was based on extraneous grounds not supported by the CGST Act and its rules. The Court observed that proof of payment was only required for the export of services, not goods, and that a reconciliation statement, already annexed to the refund application, sufficed. Additionally, the insistence on proof of export within 90 days was found to be contrary to a 2019 circular issued by the department. The Court ruled that all grounds for rejecting the refund were beyond the statutory requirements. As a result, the Court set aside the rejection order and the appellate order, directing the GST department to issue the refund along with interest to the assessee within 12 weeks.

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Related Stories
HC Restores GST Registration Subject to Filing Returns and Clearing Dues

GST • News • Case Chronicles

September 17, 2025

GST on Post-Sale Discounts – CBIC Circular 251/2025 Clarification

GST • News • Statutory Scope

September 16, 2025

HC Rules Proceedings Against Deceased Assessee A Nullity

GST • News • Case Chronicles

September 15, 2025

Writ Admission Without Interim Order Does Not Halt GST Proceedings | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

September 12, 2025

GSTN Prohibits Filing of GST Returns After Three Years From Due Date

GST • News • Statutory Scope

September 12, 2025

New GST Rates to Impact Heavy Industries and Related Sectors

GST • News • Statutory Scope

September 10, 2025

Bauxite Handling for SEZ Unit Treated as Zero-Rated Supply | AAR

GST • News • Case Chronicles

September 9, 2025

Matter Remanded as SCN Uploaded Without Assessee’s Knowledge| HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

September 8, 2025

Detailed Analysis of 56th GST Council Meeting Outcomes

GST • News • Legal Beacon

September 6, 2025

FAQs on 56th GST Council Meeting Decisions Released by Govt

GST • News • Statutory Scope

September 5, 2025