Review Petition Against Denial of Interest on Withdrawn GST Refund Held Non-Maintainable and SLP Dismissed

Inadvertent Tax Deposit & Refund Filing: The assessee deposited tax inadvertently between August 2017 and January 2018 and subsequently filed a refund application on 12-04-2018.

Deficiency Memo & Withdrawal: The Revenue issued a deficiency memo in Form GST RFD-03 on 03-03-2020 (beyond the statutory 15-day timeline), following which the assessee withdrew the refund application on 17-03-2020.

Subsequent Claim & Writ Judgment: After withdrawing the application, the assessee made its next communication on 29-08-2023 seeking the refund. In a writ petition decided on 20-05-2025, the High Court allowed the refund with 6% interest but excluded interest for the disputed period (03-03-2020 to 28-08-2023) because the refund application stood withdrawn during that interval.

Review Petition Filed: The assessee filed a review petition claiming interest for the excluded period on the ground of an error apparent on the face of the record.

High Court Dismissal: The High Court held that the original judgment recorded valid reasons for denying interest during the period when no application was pending and found no error apparent on record, making the review petition non-maintainable.

SLP Filed: The assessee challenged the High Court’s review order before the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP).

The Supreme Court found no good ground or legal infirmity to interfere with the High Court’s order disposing of the review petition.

Held that a review cannot be utilized to re-agitate merits or claim interest for a period during which a refund application remained voluntarily withdrawn.

The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the assessee was dismissed in favor of the Revenue.

Effect of Withdrawal on Interest: Statutory interest under Section 56/54 of the CGST Act does not accrue for any period during which a refund application stands voluntarily withdrawn by the assessee.

Narrow Scope of Review Jurisdiction: Review petitions under Section 114 of the CPC require a manifest error apparent on the face of the record; they cannot be invoked as an appeal in disguise to re-argue rejected claims.

Procedural Vigilance Required: Delays or gaps between the withdrawal of a refund application and filing a fresh claim directly impact the assessee’s entitlement to interest for the intervening period.