1970 (2) TMI 112 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues:
1. Assessment of sales tax for the quarter ending 31st March, 1950.
2. Refund application barred by time under section 14 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner, a limited company, was assessed to sales tax for the quarter ending 31st March, 1950. The revisional authority set aside the assessment order and directed revision based on article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Sales Tax Officer passed a reassessment order on 2nd August, 1959, directing a refund of Rs. 89,009.50 to the petitioner. The refund application was rejected on 20th July, 1964, as barred by limitation. The petitioner filed a writ application seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order and a writ of mandamus for refund.

2. The key issue was whether the refund application was time-barred under section 14 of the Act. The section stipulates a 24-month period from the date of the assessment order or a 12-month period from the final order on appeal, revision, etc. The contention was whether the revisional order of the Collector constituted a final disposal, enabling the petitioner to apply for a refund within 12 months of that order.

3. The Standing Counsel argued that the revisional order clearly exempted the dealer from tax liability for the relevant period, thus triggering the 12-month limitation period. However, the petitioner's counsel contended that the revisional order was not final but directed reassessment for refund determination by the assessing authority.

4. The Court accepted the petitioner's contention, emphasizing that the revisional order did not conclusively exempt the dealer from liability. The order directed reassessment, indicating that the refund claim should be determined based on the reassessment's outcome. Therefore, the petitioner had to wait for the reassessment order to apply for a refund.

5. The effective order for limitation purposes was deemed to be the reassessment order of 2nd August, 1959, or the communication date of 6th August, 1959. The petitioner filed the refund application on 13th August, 1959, well within the limitation period, thereby not barred by time.

6. A previous unreported case cited by the Standing Counsel was distinguished as it involved different facts where the revisional order was absolute, unlike the conditional order in the present case. The Court found no application of that case to the current situation.

7. The Standing Counsel suggested directing the Commissioner to dispose of the pending revision application. However, considering the lengthy pendency and the clarity of the petitioner's case, the Court deemed it unnecessary to issue such a direction.

8. Consequently, the writ application succeeded, with a writ of certiorari issued to quash the order refusing the refund and a writ of mandamus directing the refund without delay. No costs were awarded in the circumstances.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Orissa High Court addressed the issues of sales tax assessment and the timeliness of a refund application under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, providing a thorough examination of the legal principles and factual circumstances involved.

← Previous Next →