Gujarat High Court Says Delayed Appellate Order Upload Can't Bar GST Refund, Allows ₹5.41 Lakh Claim

The Gujarat High Court on 23 October allowed Panila Chem Limited's petition and treated the date of uploading Form GST APL-04 as the relevant date for considering its refund claim, given the peculiar facts of the case

A Division Bench comprising Justices A.S. Supehia and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati held that a delayed upload of an appellate order's summary on the GST portal cannot defeat a refund directed by the appellate authority in exceptional circumstances. It observed:

“In these peculiar circumstances, and with a view to ensuring that the petitioners' claim is not defeated solely on account of the delay in uploading the summary of the appellate order, we are of the view that the date of uploading Form GST APL-04, i.e., 03.06.2024, may be treated as the relevant date for the limited purpose of considering the petitioners' refund application in the present case.”

The dispute arose after goods purchased by Panila Chem Limited from Dasaldhan Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. were intercepted on 27 November 2019 over an alleged e-way bill defect. Proceedings under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, resulted in a tax and penalty demand of Rs. 5,41,032, which the company paid to secure the release of the goods.

The company appealed, and the appellate authority allowed its appeal on 28 February 2022, finding that the e-way bill was active and that there was no intention to evade tax. It directed a refund subject to verification. Although the physical order was provided to the company's authorised representative on 8 March 2022, its summary in Form GST APL-04 was uploaded on the GST portal only on 3 June 2024.

It applied for a refund on 4 June 2024. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the application on 10 July 2024, and the appellate authority dismissed the company's subsequent appeal on 30 January 2025, holding that the claim exceeded the two-year limitation period calculated from 8 March 2022.

The Court observed that ordinarily, the date of communication of the physical appellate order would determine limitation. However, given the extended delay in uploading the summary and the company's application the following day, it held that the refund directed by the appellate authority could not be defeated on limitation grounds.

Accordingly, it quashed the rejection orders and directed a refund of Rs. 5,41,032, with interest at 6% per annum from 15 August 2024, within 12 weeks, failing which interest at 9% per annum would apply thereafter. It also permitted an offline refund application if technical issues prevented online processing.

Counsel for Petitioners: Krutarth K. Desai and Abhay Y. Desai, Advocates

Counsel for Respondents: Raj Tanna, Assistant Government Pleader; Neel P. Lakhani, Advocate