2004 (12) TMI 373 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Rate of octroi that could be charged on rectified spirit imported into the municipal limits by the applicant- appellant for its distillery to manufacture potable alcohol Held that - As the material produced by the applicant clearly shows that the applicant has not passed on the additional octroi collected from it to its consumers. Even from which this application has arisen it is in very clear terms stated that the applicant is entitled to recover the difference of octroi duty and from the material on record it is clear that there is no dispute that excess duty was in fact collected by the municipality; the argument of unjust enrichment is being raised for the first time before this Court in opposition to this application and we find no merit in the same. Thus allow this application and direct the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Aurangabad to refund the excess octroi amount which has been computed at Rs. 3,51,94,471 with interest at six per cent.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over octroi rate on rectified spirit
2. Entitlement to recover excess octroi amount
3. Claim for refund and interest
4. Objection of unjust enrichment
5. Burden of proof on passing on octroi to consumers

Issue 1: Dispute over octroi rate on rectified spirit
In the case, a dispute arose between the applicant and Municipal Corporation regarding the rate of octroi on rectified spirit imported for alcohol production. The Court held that octroi duty should be at 2%, not the higher rate charged. The direction was to recover the excess duty from the appellant.

Issue 2: Entitlement to recover excess octroi amount
The applicant sought clarification as the municipality did not refund the excess octroi as directed. The Court found the applicant entitled to recover the difference and ordered the municipality to refund Rs. 3,51,94,471 with 6% interest in 24 monthly installments.

Issue 3: Claim for refund and interest
The applicant requested clarification and refund of excess octroi along with interest at 12%. The Court directed the municipality to refund the amount with 6% interest in installments due to the substantial sum involved.

Issue 4: Objection of unjust enrichment
The municipality argued against the refund, claiming the appellant passed on the excess octroi to consumers, leading to unjust enrichment. However, the Court found no merit in this argument as the appellant proved it did not pass on the additional octroi collected.

Issue 5: Burden of proof on passing on octroi to consumers
The Court directed the applicant to provide evidence that the excess octroi was not passed on to consumers. The applicant submitted a detailed statement supported by an auditor's report, which remained uncontested by the municipality. The Court concluded that the burden of proof was met, and the municipality was ordered to refund the excess amount to the applicant.