Bombay High Court

Lubrizol Advanced Materials India Private LimitedversusThe Union of India

Decided: 24 August 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is allowed; the impugned order and show‑cause notice are quashed and the refund claim must be reconsidered de novo in accordance with law.

Summary

The petitioner, Lubrizol Advance Materials India Pvt Ltd, filed a writ petition seeking to quash a GST refund denial and a show‑cause notice issued by the respondent authority, arguing that its services should be treated as export of services under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. The petitioner relied on a recent decision of this Court in WP/987/2026, which had remitted a similar matter for de novo consideration. The respondents did not contest the applicability of that precedent. The Court held that the earlier judgment required the refund application to be reconsidered afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petition was allowed, the impugned order and notice were set aside, and the respondent was directed to rehear the refund claim within three weeks. All parties' contentions were kept open pending the fresh determination.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner’s services qualify as ‘export of services’ under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017.
Whether the respondent’s order denying the refund and the show‑cause notice should be quashed in view of the precedent set in WP/987/2026.

Legislation cited

Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act, 2017 — s. 2(6)

Subjects

GST refund
Export of services
IGST Act
De novo hearing
Writ petition
Quash order

Judgment

          Digitally
          signed by
          RUPALI
RUPALI    RAJESH                                                     21-WP-1076-2026.doc
RAJESH    WAKODIKAR
WAKODIKAR Date:
          2026.08.27
          18:25:40
          +0530
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                              WRIT PETITION NO. 1076 OF 2026


                 Lubrizol Advance Materials
                 India Private Limited                         ...Petitioner
                       Versus
                 The Union of India & Ors.                     ...Respondents


                 Mr. Bharat Raichandani a/w Mr. Mahesh Raichandani a/w Mr.
                 Bhagrati Sahu i/b UBR Legal Advocates for the Petitioner.

                 Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Addl.G.P for the Respondent-State.

                                           CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
                                                   SANDESH D. PATIL JJ.
                                          DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2026



                 ORDER (PER SANDESH D.PATIL, J.):


                  1.        By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking to quash

                  and set aside the impugned order in Form GST RFD 06 dated 19 th

                  November, 2025 and Show-cause Notice dated 15 th October, 2025

                  passed by the respondent No.2.



                  2.        The basic contention of the petitioner is that the action of

  Wakodikar                                                                          1/3
                                                               21-WP-1076-2026.doc


            the respondent No.2 was unilateral, the petitioner’s legitimate refund

            claim of Rs.68,74,394/- for the period August, 2024 was rejected on

            an erroneous premise that the petitioner is an intermediary and the

            services rendered by the petitioner do not qualify as “export of

            services” under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. Learned Counsel

            for the petitioner states that his case is squarely covered by the

            Judgment of this Court passed in WP/987/2026 dated 4 th March,

            2026 in the matter of Lubrizol Advance Materials India Pvt.Ltd. V/s

            Union of India & Ors.



            3.          Learned Counsel for the respondents does not dispute this

            position.



            4.          In the matter of Lubrizol Advance Material India Pvt.Ltd.

            (supra), this Court had remitted the matter back to the Appellate

            Authority for de novo consideration and for a fresh order to be

            passed in accordance with law. This petition can be disposed of by

            passing the same order. In this premises, the respondent No.2 is


Wakodikar                                                                      2/3
                                                                21-WP-1076-2026.doc


            directed to reconsider the refund application of the petitioner in

            accordance with law. Hence, the following order :

                                          ORDER

                      (i)         Writ Petition No. 1076 of 2026 is allowed.

                      (ii)        The impugned order in Form GST RFD 06
                      dated 19th November, 2025 and Show-cause Notice dated
                      15th October, 2025 passed by the respondent No.2 is
                      quashed and set aside.

                      (iii)       The respondent No.2 is directed to consider
                      the case of the petitioner de novo, in accordance with law
                      and after hearing the parties.

                      (iv)        The respondent No.2 shall complete the
                      determination within a period of three weeks from the
                      communication of this order.



            5.        Petition is accordingly disposed of on the aforesaid terms.


            6.        All contentions of all parties are kept open.



            (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                         (M. S. KARNIK, J.)



Wakodikar                                                                       3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.