M/S MERCK LIFE SCIENCE PRIVATE LIMITED

Vs.

THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

WRIT PETITION NO. 27259 OF 2024 (T-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 27261 OF 2024 (T-RES), WRIT PETITION NO. 27552 OF 2024 (T-RES), WRIT PETITION NO. 27691 OF 2024 (T-RES), WRIT PETITION NO. 28151 OF 2024 (T-RES) 

HIGH COURT: Karnataka

DATED: 07.11.2025

Citation: 2025 Taxo.online 3034

When excess IGST undisputed and same liability discharged under correct head to State, Centre cannot retain duplicate tax merely on technical limitation, refund must be examined on merits.

Refund – Excess IGST payment – Petitioner, intermediary service provider paid IGST to Central authorities and subsequently discharged same tax liability to State GST authorities realising services rendered as intra-state supply  not export of services – Central Authorities admitted excess payment but rejected refund on ground of limitation under Section 54 of CGST Act and Rule 89(1A) of CGST Rules – High Courts held Section 54 & Rule 89(1A) directory not mandatory – As per Article 265 Centre could not retain tax not legally due – Applying principles of restitution and unjust enrichment retention of IGST by Central Authorities without entitlement unlawful – Right to refund of excess IGST upheld as amount was subsequently paid to appropriate State GST Authorities

To read more about this Judgement, subscribe today: https://taxo.online/product/taxo-pro/

Already a subscriber, Click to LOGIN & refer to the TAXO GST CASE LAWS

     Or

Call us:- +91 99101 67919, 99996 93426