Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited vs Union Of India
2025 Latest Caselaw 9894 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited vs Union Of India on 6 November, 2025

Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                                           -1-
                                                          NC: 2025:KHC:44795
                                                    WP No. 21506 of 2025


                HC-KAR



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                       DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

                                         BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 21506 OF 2025 (T-RES)
                BETWEEN:

                GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
                A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
                COMPANIES ACT (1), 1956,
                HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
                WING A, WING B, GROUND TO 6TH FLOOR,
                HELIOS BUSINESS PARK,
                150 OUTER RING ROAD,
                KADUBEESANAHALLI,
                BENGALURU - 560 103 AND
                REPRESENTED BY ITS
                MANAGING DIRECTOR
                MR.AKBAR AMIN.
                                                               ...PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by       (BY SRI KUMAR HARSHAVARDHAN AND
NAGAVENI            SRI BHARATH JANARTHANAN, ADVOCATES)
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka       AND:

                1.    UNION OF INDIA
                      THROUGH ITS SECRETARY,
                      DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
                      MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
                      GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
                      CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,
                      NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
                           -2-
                                     NC: 2025:KHC:44795
                                  WP No. 21506 of 2025


HC-KAR




2.   PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,
     BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE, DIVISION-I
     TRAFFIC AND TRANSIT MANAGEMENT CENTRE,
     B.M.T.C. BUS STAND, HAL AIRPORT ROAD,
     DOMMALURU, BENGALURU - 560 071.

3.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,
     GST COMMISSIONERATE, BENGALURU EAST,
     DIVISION - 8, TTMC, BTMC, DOMLUR,
     BENGALURU - 560 071.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI UNNIKRISHNAN M., ADVOCATE)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A
WRIT OF DECLARATION OR ANY OTHER WRIT IN THE NATURE
OF DECLARATION OR DIRECTION OR ORDER THEREBY
DECLARING THAT INTEREST ON DELAYED REFUNDS UNDER
SECTION 11BB OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 READ
WITH SECTION 83 OF THE FINANCE ACT, 1994 IS AUTOMATIC
AND PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE DATE AFTER
EXPIRY OF THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORIGINAL
FILING OF THE REFUND APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF
ACTUAL PAYMENT OF THE REFUND WITHOUT MAKING ANY
APPLICATION TO THIS EFFECT; II) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS, OR DIRECTION OR ORDER THEREBY DIRECTING
THE   RESPONDENTS,    THEIR   SERVANTS,   AGENTS    OR
REPRESENTATIVES TO FORTHWITH GRANT AND SANCTION
INTEREST OF RS. 44,29,76,104 ON DELAYED REFUND
SANCTIONED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER
2007 TO JUNE 2017, FROM THE DATE AFTER EXPIRY OF THREE
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORIGINAL FILING OF THE
REFUND APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT OF
THE REFUND.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                   -3-
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:44795
                                             WP No. 21506 of 2025


 HC-KAR



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR


                               ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner is seeking the following

reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of declaration or any other writ in the nature of declaration or direction or order thereby declaring that interest on delayed refunds under section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 is automatic and payable to the petitioner from the date after expiry of three months from the date of the original filing of the refund application till the date of actual payment of the refund without making any application to this effect;

ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ in the nature of Mandamus, or direction or order thereby directing the Respondents, their servants, agents or representatives to forthwith grant and sanction interest of Rs.44,29,76,104 on delayed refund sanctioned to the petitioner for the period October 2007 to June 2017, from the date after expiry of three months from the date of the original filing of the refund application till the date of actual payment of the refund; and / or

iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction as deemed fit and appropriate by this Hon'ble Court."

2. Heard Sri Kumar Harshavardhan and Sri Bharath

Janarthanan, learned counsel for petitioner and

Sri Unnikrishnan M., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3

and perused the material on record.

NC: 2025:KHC:44795

HC-KAR

3. A perusal at the material on record will indicate that for

the period October, 2007 to June, 2017, the petitioner filed

refund claims, seeking refund of unutilized CENVAT credit in

terms of Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. During the

period from March, 2009 to June, 2020, the petitioner received

orders sanctioning the refund claims, which is tabulated at

Annexure 'A'. On 14.11.2009, the respondents - Revenue

issued a show cause notice seeking to reject the entire refund

claim. Thereafter, by a series of orders passed by the

competent authority, the refund claim of the petitioner was

upheld and the same have attained finality and become binding

upon the respondents. Under these circumstances, the

petitioner submitted an application seeking disbursement of

interest on belated sanction of the refund claims. Since the

respondents did not respond to the same, the petitioner is

before this Court by way of the present petition by placing

reliance upon the following judgments:

a. FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [2024 : KHC :

16563]

NC: 2025:KHC:44795

HC-KAR

b. THE OCWEN FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMTIED VS. THE UNION OF INDIA [2024 : KHC : 32404]

c. LG SOFT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. THE UNION OF INDIA [2024 (3) TMI 794 - Kar HC]

d. AI TISOURCE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX [2022 (12) TMI 974 - Kar HC].

4. A perusal of the material on record and the aforesaid

facts and circumstances, would indicate is that the petitioner

has been sanctioned refund and the short issue that would now

arise for consideration is,

'Whether the petitioner would be entitled to interest

on the delayed refund claims made by the petitioner'.

5. In this context, this Court in the case of FIDELITY

BUSINESS SERVICES (supra) has held as follows:

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited my attention to the application dated 14.10.2022 submitted by the petitioner for refund of interest on delayed receipt of Service Tax refund for the period commencing from July, 2007 upto June, 2017 as enumerated in Annexure-B series (colly). It is submitted that as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act'), the petitioner would be entitled for refund of interest

NC: 2025:KHC:44795

HC-KAR

granted in his favour upon expiry of 90 days from the date of submission of the application, if the refund is not made back to the petitioner within the said period i.e., 90 days.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents-revenue does not dispute that the refund has already been granted in favour of the petitioner. However, various other contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner are disputed and it is submitted that there is no merit in the petition and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition.

5. As rightly contended by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, a perusal of the material on record, comprising of the details of the refund orders and refund payments made in favour of the petitioner as enumerated in Annexure-C1 clearly indicate that the petitioner would be entitled for interest for delayed refund in terms of Section 11BB of the Act. Under these circumstances, there is absolutely no impediment to direct the respondents to grant applicable interest on delayed refund in terms of Section 11BB of the Act in favour of the petitioner. However, in order to grant an opportunity to the concerned respondent for the limited purpose to verify the calculation of quantum of interest on the delayed refund as clamed by the petitioner, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the concerned respondent to grant interest on the refund as sought for in Annexure-B series dated 14.10.2022 in favour of the petitioner after making due verification and in accordance with law within a stipulated time frame."

In the instant case, the respondents having not

considered the claim of the petitioner for interest on delayed

refund and in the light of the principles laid down in the afore-

extracted judgment of this Court, I am of the considered

opinion that the present petition deserves to be disposed off,

directing the concerned respondent to grant interest on the

delayed refund as sought for at Annexures 'B' and 'C', within a

stipulated time frame.

NC: 2025:KHC:44795

HC-KAR

6. In the result, I pass the following:-

ORDER

(i) Writ Petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The respondents are directed to grant / pay interest on delayed refund to the petitioner as sought for in Annexures 'B' and 'C', dated 05.12.2024 and 17.01.2025 respectively, after due verification as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/-

(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

NVJ