ANKUR AGARWAL vs CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 06th May, 2025 + W.P.(C) 5414/2025 ANKUR AGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: versus CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Samiksha Godiyal, SSC-CBIC. 2. Mr. B. D. Rao Kundan, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The Petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking some mechanism for filing an undertaking for the purpose of re-crediting the rejected refund amount. 3. The brief background is that the Petitioner runs a sole proprietorship firm by the name M/s Safecon Lifesciences and is engaged in exports of Veterinary medicines. The Petitioner was tagged as ‘Risky Exporter’ by the Directorate General of Analytics and Risk Management (hereinafter, ‘DGARM’), leading to the withholding of their Integrated Goods and Services Tax (hereinafter, ‘IGST’) refunds, which resulted in various refund applications filed by the Petitioner not being processed. The Petitioner is Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 5414/2025 Page 1 of 5 Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:09.05.2025 19:35:22 registered with Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax (hereinafter, ‘GST’) Commissionerate at Rudrapur with GSTIN-05AHQPA3114Q1Z9. 4. In one of the applications made by the Petitioner, an order was passed by the concerned Deputy Commissioner, Rudrapur vide which the refund application of the Petitioner was rejected. In order to enable the Petitioner to have the re-crediting of the IGST which has already been paid by him by way of the Input Tax Credit, an undertaking is required to be submitted. The direction given by Deput