[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
M/S Aviation Management Sales Llc vs The Union Of India on 11 March, 2026
Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:14515
WP No. 22257 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 22257 OF 2022 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S. AVIATION MANAGEMENT SALES LLC,
A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ORGANIZED
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
2916, CURTIS KING BOULEVARD, HANGER E19
FORT PIERCE,
FLORIDA 034946, USA.
ALSO AT:
NO.27 JALAN SUNGAI CONGAK 32/51 F
BUKIT RIMAU, 40460
SHAH ALAM SELANGOR
MALAYSIA.
REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE,
(SOUTH EAST ASIA REPRESENTATIVE)
Digitally signed
by VIJAYA P MRS. SYAKILA RENU BINTI ABDULLAH
Location: HIGH ...PETITIONER
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI -110001.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:14515
WP No. 22257 of 2022
HC-KAR
2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
MYSURU,
S-1 AND S-2, VINAYA MARGA,
SIDDHARATHA NAGAR,
MYSURU - 570011.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,
WEST DIVISION-2, GST WEST COMMISSIONERATE,
1ST FLOOR, BMTC TTMC BUS STAND COMPLEX,
BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU - 560070.
4. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR,
THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
CORPORATE BHAVAN, NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR,
RAHEJA TOWERS, M. G. ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560001.
5. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRALTAX,
BENGALURU WEST COMMISSIONERATE,
1ST FLOOR, BMTC TTMC BUS STAND COMPLEX,
BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU - 560070.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3 AND R5;
MS. KRUTHIKA RAGHAVAN, ADV. FOR R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THAT AN
AMOUNT OF RS.11,03,71,781/- BEING THE INTEGRATED
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND COMPENSATION CESS PAID
BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE
INTEGRATED GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017, BE
REFUNDED TO THE PETITIONER FORTHWITH TOGETHER WITH
INTEREST THEREON FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THIS
AMOUNT WAS REMITTED BY THE R4 TILL THE DATE (S) ON
WHICH THE REFUND IS PAID TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC.,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:14515
WP No. 22257 of 2022
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo for
withdrawal which reads as follows:
"On the instructions of the Petitioner, the
Advocate for the Petitioner most humbly submits
on its behalf as follows:
1. The above writ petition was filed challenging
the impugned Order-in-Original dated
09.09.2020 passed by the 3rd Respondent in
Form-RFD-06 and the subsequent Order-in-
Appeal dated 04.10.2021 passed by the 2nd
Respondent, by which both Respondents
rejected the claim of the 4th Respondent (the
Official Liquidator, Hon'ble High Court of
Karnataka) for refund of Integrated Goods and
Services Tax ('IGST' for short) and
Compensation Cess amounting to
Rs.11,03,71,781/- paid by the Petitioner in
relation to an export of an aircraft made in the
month of October 2018. Although the said
amount was paid by the Petitioner, since it
was ultimately remitted by the 4th Respondent
to the credit of the Revenue on behalf of the
Petitioner, the 4th Respondent filed the refund
application as advised.
2. The Petitioner submits that the 3rd Respondent
rejected the claim of refund of the 4th
Respondent on the ground that it is the
NC: 2026:KHC:14515
HC-KAR
Petitioner, and not the 4th Respondent, who
had exported the goods. The subsequent
Order-in-Appeal passed by the 2nd Respondent
upheld the impugned Order-in-Original while
leaving this aforesaid finding undisturbed.
3. Aggrieved by the non-grant of refund to it
despite the above finding that it had exported
the goods, the Petitioner filed this writ petition
questioning the same. However, in the
Statement of Objections filed by the 1st to 3rd
Respondents before this Hon'ble Court, this
writ petition is opposed on the ground that
since the impugned orders were passed
rejecting the application for refund filed by the
4th Respondent, the Petitioner cannot
challenge the said orders in this writ petition.
4. This being the case, the Petitioner now seeks
leave of this Hon'ble Court to withdraw the
present writ petition while reserving liberty to
file an application under Section 54 of the
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for
refund of the said amount of
Rs.11,03,71,781/- admittedly paid by it,
especially given that it is a settled position of
law that the time period stated in Section 54 is
merely directory and not mandatory. In any
event, the entire period from the date on
which the 4th Respondent filed the refund
application on behalf of the Petitioner i.e.,
12.03.2020, till the date of disposal of this writ
petition ought to stand excluded as per
Section 14 of the Limitation Act and in the
unique facts and circumstances of this case
and in the interests of justice and equity.
In view of the above, it is most humbly prayed
that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
take this memo on record and pass orders
NC: 2026:KHC:14515
HC-KAR
disposing off this writ petition as withdrawn while
granting liberty to the Petitioner to file an
application under Section 54 of the Central Goods
and Services Tax Act, 2017, for refund of
Rs.11,03,71,781/- paid by it and to also direct
the concerned Respondents to consider and
expeditiously dispose off the said application to
be filed by the Petitioner in accordance with law
and without any reference to limitation, in the
interests of justice and equity."
2. In light of the same, petition is dismissed.
Liberty is reserved to be pursued as is permissible in law.
All contentions of both sides are kept open.
Sd/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
MCR
