Genpact India Pvt. Ltd vs Principal Commissioner Of Gst And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 12515 P&H

                                                       Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104030-DB




CWP-14151-2021 (O&M)              2023:PHHC:104030-DB                      -1-

     HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                      CWP-14151-2021 (O&M)
                                      Decided on: 09.08.2023


Genpact India Pvt. Ltd.                                    ....Petitioner

                                     V/s.

Principal Commissioner of
GST and CX, Gurugram and another                           ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:    Mr. Tarun Sethi, Sr. Advocate with
            Mr. Rohit Sud, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Sharan Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel
            (Indirect Taxes) for the respondents.

                  ****

Ritu Bahri, J.

1. CM-6621-CWP-2022

Application is allowed and rejoinder to reply filed by the

respondents is taken on record.

2. CWP-14151-2021

The petitioner is seeking writ of certiorari for quashing and

setting aside Demand cum Show cause Notice No. 47/GST/GGM/2020-21

dated 30.03.2021 ('impugned notice") (Annexure P-29) issued by Principal

Commissioner of GST & CX, Gurugram-respondent No.1 under Sections 73

of the Finance Act, 1994 ("Act, 1994") read with Section 174 of Central

Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 ("CGST Act") requiring the petitioner to

explain why the extended period of limitation in terms of proviso to Section

73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 should not be invoked for recovery of refund

of Rs.2,64,92,41,846/- granted to the petitioner. The impugned notice

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104030-DB

CWP-14151-2021 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:104030-DB -2-

further requires the petitioner to explain why service tax of

Rs.16,73,74,91,090/- should not be demanded and recovered from the

petitioner.

3. On 30.07.2021, when notice of motion was issued, reference

was made to CWP-6048-2021 titled as Genpact India (P) Ltd. vs. Union of

India and others, (2022) 1 Centax 226 (P&H), decided on 11.11.2022 in

which notice had already been issued and was pending for consideration. In

that writ petition, the petitioner had challenged order dated 15.02.2021

whereby refund claim of un-utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) used in making

zero rated supplies of services under GST regime had been rejected. The

main ground of the petitioner in that writ petition was that refunds had been

granted to the petitioner consistently for all financial years starting from

2005-06 under the service tax regime and, therefore, on the principle of

consistency, refunds under the GST regime should also be granted.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner had argued that impugned

notice has been issued as a counterblast after filing of CWP-6048-2021, for

recovery of Rs.26,34,61,625/-and the said amount should not be demanded

from the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the judgment

dated 11.11.2022 passed in CWP-6048-2021 fully covers the case of the

petitioner as in that case, this Court, vide detailed judgment, held that the

petitioner was not "intermediary" and, therefore, the refund claim of un-

utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) used in making zero rated supplies of

services without payment of IGST was allowed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the

respondents have implemented the judgment dated 11.11.2022 passed in

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104030-DB

CWP-14151-2021 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:104030-DB -3-

CWP-6048-2021 by detailed order and also decided to file SLP in the

Hon'ble Supreme Court. Finally refund for an amount of Rs.21,98,06,002/-

for the period April 2019 to June 2019 has been sanctioned by the Deputy

Director Division East-II, Central Tax GST Gurugram. It is further stated

therein that as per the letter dated 08.05.2023 issued by CBIC, the

respondents have decided not to file SLP against the judgment dated

11.11.2022 passed in CWP-6048-2021.

7. Hence, this Court is of the view that since the respondents have

taken conscious decision not to file SLP against the judgment dated

11.11.2022 passed in CWP-6048-2021, the ratio of Genpact India (P.) Ltd's

case (supra) is directly applicable in this case.

8. Writ petition is allowed and notice dated 30.03.2021 (Annexure

P-29) is set aside.

                                                        (RITU BAHRI)
                                                           JUDGE



09.08.2023                                           (MANISHA BATRA)
Divyanshi                                                JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:          Yes/No
Whether reportable:                 Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104030-DB

3 of 3