Bombay High Court
K LINE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court ordered the refund application to be processed per CGST Rules 90 and 92, without being influenced by the earlier orders, and disposed of the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, K Line (India) Private Limited, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an Order-in-Appeal dated 31 July 2023 and an ex parte refund order dated 13 September 2019. The petitioner argued that the matter had already been decided by this Court in K Line India Pvt Ltd v Union of India (WPL/36200/2023) on 15 April 2026. The respondents did not contest that the issues were identical. The Court directed the respondents to process the petitioner’s refund application within six weeks, applying the provisions of Rules 90 and 92 of the CGST Rules and ignoring the earlier orders. All contentions of the parties were kept open, and the petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the earlier Order-in-Appeal and ex parte refund order should be set aside in view of the later judgment in K Line India Pvt Ltd v Union of India.
- Whether the refund application must be processed under CGST Rules 90 and 92 irrespective of the earlier orders.
Legislation cited
- Central Goods and Services Tax Rules — s. Rule 90, Rule 92
Subjects
- GST refund
- CGST Rules
- ex parte order
- high court writ petition
- tax litigation
- order quashing
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
RUPALI
RUPALI RAJESH 8-WP-3824-2026.doc
RAJESH WAKODIKAR
WAKODIKAR Date:
2026.08.21
10:40:24
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3824 OF 2026
K Line (India) Private Limited ...Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Bharat Raichandani a/w Mr. Mahesh Raichandani a/w Bhagrati
Sahu i/b UBR Legal Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. Himanshu Takke, A.G.P for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Subir Kumar a/w Ms. Sangeeta Yadav & Ms. Ashita Aggarwal for
the Respondent.
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL JJ.
DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026
P.C. :
1. By the present petition, the Petitioner is seeking quashing
and setting aside of the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 31 st July,
2023 issued by the respondent No.3 and the impugned exparte
refund application order dated 13th September, 2019.
Wakodikar 1/3
8-WP-3824-2026.doc
2. The contention of the Petitioner is that the issue in
question is squarely covered by the Judgment of this Court in the
case of K Line India Pvt.Ltd. V. Union of India & Ors. in
WPL/36200/2023 with group of other petitions decided on 15 th
April, 2026. It is submitted that the decision is rendered in the case
of the Petitioners themselves. The said Judgment dated 15 th April,
2026 is produced for our perusal. We have gone through the said
Judgment.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents does not
dispute that the issue in hand is identical to that involved in
WPL/36200/2023. This petition can be disposed of in premises of
the same order. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The Respondents to process the Refund Application
filed by the Petitioner within a period of six weeks from
the date the copy of this order is presented.
(ii) The order be passed on such Refund Application as
Wakodikar 2/3
8-WP-3824-2026.doc
per the provisions of rules and more particularly, Rules 90
and 92 of the CGST Rules without being influenced by the
order dated 31st July, 2023 issued by the respondent No.3
and order dated 13th September, 2019 issued by the
respondent No.4.
(iii) All the contentions of the parties are expressly kept
open.
4. Petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Wakodikar 3/3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.