Rep by vice Presid-ent FinanCe Mr v. Sachidananda Althal'

Ranoareddv csr comlnissi-ono"i", +tn Floor, H. No.10-3-301 to 303, serene i-E[ii;, ffir"yrn rttag,r' Masab Tank' Hvderabad-500028'

3. The Commissioner of Central Tax, Rangareddy GST Commissionerate' " i-seltlh,itp Hirrs, iai Hino Colonv, tu"aarrapur' Hyderabad-50008'1 ' 4. The Union of lndia, Through the Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001' ....RESPONDENTS Petition una", nrti.t" 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature wRlT oF MANDAMUS(a)settingasidethelmpugnedorderbearingorderNo.HYD-GST- RRC-APP1-14g-2g-24 dated 2910912023 passed by the Respondent No.1 by disallowingtherefundofRs.5,67,38,698/-fortheperiodOctober2020to t \ 7 December 2020. (b) To uphold the Refund Sanction Order No 283610220054791 dated 07t1O|2OZ2 passed by Respondent No.2 l.A.NO:1 OF 2024 Petition Under Section 151 Cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the writ petition, the High court may be preased to stay the operation of the lmpugned Order bearing Order No. HYD_GST-RRC_ APP' -149-23-24 dared 2gtogt2o23 in respect of issues charenged in this writ petition. -S.fr-!lneNDRA DAVE, cOUNSEL AppEAR|NG Counsel for the petitionel FOR M/S LAKSHMI KUMARAN EruO SNiOirIiNEr,i-' Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : SMT BOKARO SAPNA REDDY COUNSEI fOr thE RESPONdENT NO.4 : DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA W.P.NO :,26419 oF 2024 Between: M/s. ADP Private Limitert Sr7. No B8/AA and 8B/E, Block-C, One West Building, Hil*sils;ii,I8:ur,,,,i::,ttitv?f ,,lrtnru;i#nl1,"j'",1'oo5* AND .....PETITIONER t 1 2 J 4 The Additional Commissiongl (Apfeals-l),, GST and Centrat Tax, 7th Floor. GST Bhavan, LB stadium noab,'tiaJt"rLerors;, Hyil;o"d s00004. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Tax, Gachibowli GST Division, Rangareddv GSr commissionLiate. +iriir"-"r, ri]iltl! o-e-301 to 303, serene Heights, Humayan Nagar, uasao i:inri, Hvo""lroilt'_icjooza. The Commissioner of Central Tax, Rangareddy GST Commissionerate, 1_ 98 t 7 t 43. Vt p H i I I s, Ja i H ind Co to ;y, Ma ji;iii,H"vidrr"o"o-50008 The Union of lndia. Throuoh the.Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, North Btock, Ner,V Deihili0o0l ' \v vvYvrrrrrr( 1 . .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction particurarry one in the nature WRrr oF MANDAMUS (a)setting aside the lmpugned Order bearing Order No HYD-GST - RRC - APPI-149-23-24 daled 2910912023 passed by the Respondent No 1 by disallowing the refund of Rs'6,95'26'B19/- for the period July 2020 to September 2020. (b)To uphold the Refund Sanction Order No 2C3609220027589 dated 01l}gl2)22 passed by Respondent No'2' l.A.NO:1 oF 2024 PetitionUnderSectionl5,lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedin the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition' the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the lmpugned Order bearing Order No HYD-GST-RRC- Appl_149_23_24 dated 2grogr2o23 in respect of issues chailenged in this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI NARENDRA DAVE' COUNSEL APPEARING i5n rvri. raisnMl KUMARAN AND SRIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos'1 to 3 : SMT BOKARO SAPNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No'4 : DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following COMMON ORDER l t : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH ANID THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHruDDIN WRIT PE TITION Nos .26406 and 26419 of 2024 COMMON ORDE R: Sri Narendra Dave, learned counsel appears for M/s. Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan, learned counsel for petrtioner. Smt. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Counsel fbr Central Iloard of lndirect Taxes & Customs appears for respondent Nos.l to 3.

2. These two Writ petitions assail the order_in_appeal passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals_I), Hyderabad, respondent No. I , in respect of July, 2020, to September, 2020, and October, 2020, to December, 2020, wherein the appellate authoritv uile common order dated 29.09.2023 has set aside the refund sancrion orders dated 02.09.2022 and 07.10.2022 passed by the Deputy commissioner of centrar Tax, Hyderabad, inter aria holding that the Refund Sanctioning Authority erred in classifuing the service as export of service without examining nature of ( -.'".<r< ----.--- I 2 HCJ {AKrS, J) & GMM, J W.P.Nos 26406 and 26119 ol2021 \ .-. '1 ./. - service, place of provision of service and the applicability of sub- section (3) to (13) of Section 13 of Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'IGST Act' 2017')' on the question whether the supply qualifies as export and whether the refund is permissible.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that being persuaded by the order-in-appeal passed for the above periods' the Refund Sanctioning Authority has been rejecting the prayer for refund for subsequent period i'e', Aprll' 2022' to June' 2022' as would be apparent from the order dated 18'06'2024' Annexure P.12. It is submitted that the application for sanction of refund has not been undertaken after independent verification ofthe claim but being guided by the common order passed Oy ti Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I) in the above departmental appeals filed for the previous year. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready to approach the Goods and Services Tax Appetlate Tribunal' which is going to be constituted on 01'10'2025' for assailing the impugned appellate orders on all grourrds of law and fact as may be available to the petitioner. However, tilI then, this Court may be pleased to I J L / )J HCJ (AKrS. J)& Gi!1M. J W P Nos.26406 and 261rs oi 2024 observe that the claims for refund for subsequent period should not be rejected simply on the basis of the impugned order-in-appeal passed in respect ofthe petitioner for previous tax periods.

4. Learned counsel for the department submits that the claim for refund for any subsequent period has to be processed or adjudicated on verification of all supporting documents, agreements etc in accordance with law. As such,, the apprehension of the petitioner is misplaced. She submits that the impugned order-in-appeal passed by the appellate authority is not vulnerable as petitioner in the exercise for the instant claim for refund could not.justiflz that its claim was fully based on the tumover of zero rated supply of services as stipulated under Rule g9(4)(D) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short',the CGST Rules, 2017'). Moreover, the Refund Sanctioning Authority had failed to determine the ad.iusted total tumover as stipulated in Rule 89(4)(E) of the CGST Rutes. 2017, in the absence of proper verification of the agreements covering the said tax period to asceftain the nature of servicerplace of provision of services as to whether the export of services qualifu under Section 2(6) of IGST .ff1 \ Act. [{owever, she does not object to the prayer of the writ petitioner to avail the appellate remedy before the GST Tribunal under Section I 12 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act'

5. In that view of the matter, both the instant Writ Petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the GST Tribunal within a period of thirty (30) days of its constitution' Let it be made clear that we have not entered into the merits of the case ol the parties. However, we deem it proper to observe that white deciding the petitioner's claims relating to subsequent period, the Ref'und Sanctioning Authority should not be influenced by the impugned order-in-appeal passed by respondent No'1 for previous period. There shall be no order as to costs' Miscellaneous applications , if anypending'' 'huil ttund closed' //TRUE COPY// SD/- L. VIJAYA LAXMI sitsrarur REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To ral Tax, 7th Floor, Cent 1. The Additional Commisslo ner (APPeals- r), GS erabad 500004 GST Bhruan, LB Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, 2. The DePutY Commissione r of Central Tax' Gachibo wli GST Division' RangareddY GST Commissionerate, 4th Floor' H.N o.10-3-301 to 303, Serene Heights, HumaYan Nagar, Masab Tank, HYdera bad-500028. 3. The Commission er of CentralTax, Rang areddY GST Commt ssionerate, 1 - 9817t43, VIP Hills, Jai Hind ColonY' Madhapur, HYd erabad-50008 4. The Secretary to Government, Unio n of lndia, Ivlinistry of Finance' North Block, New Delhi 1 '10001 . 5. One C C to M/s LAKSHMI KUMARAN AND SRIDHARAN' Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC tO SMT. BOKARO SAPNA RED DY (SENIOR SC FOR CBIC) , 8IJ"% to DEPUTY sollclroR GENERAL oF INDIA' (.PUC) 8. Two CD CoPies '\,4t 1 SA LS I HIGH COURT DATED:25 tOBt2O2S COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.264O6 AND 26419 o12024 r.<, \,,:, \.-+\. + \{'^*,'. ---.-----._ : - I DISPOSING BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS.