Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + AT VAT and Sales Tax - 1999 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (2) TMI 643 - AT - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues:
1. Application for review of assessment order and issuance of refund order.
2. Delay in issuance of refund order by the tax authorities.
3. Legality of review by a successor-in-office under the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941.
4. Direction for refund payment, cost, and interest.

Analysis:
1. The applicant filed an application for review of an assessment order made by respondent No. 1 under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. After a direction from the Tribunal, a review order was passed, acknowledging an excess tax payment by the applicant. However, despite subsequent requests for a refund order, none was issued, leading to the present application.

2. The Tribunal heard arguments from the applicant's advocate and the State Representative. The applicant's counsel highlighted the reluctance of authorities to issue refund orders, necessitating dealer interventions. On the other hand, the State Representative cited delays due to the transfer of the Commercial Tax Officer responsible for the review order, who identified missed taxable transactions. This led to a plan for a second review before addressing the refund request.

3. During the hearing, it was noted that the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 do not permit a review by a successor-in-office, as explicitly stated in rule 82. While the successor can seek revision from a higher authority within 60 days of the order, no such application had been made in this case. Consequently, the Tribunal directed respondent No. 1 to issue a refund payment order to the applicant within three weeks.

4. In addition to the refund directive, the Tribunal ordered respondent No. 1 to pay a token cost of Rs. 250 to the applicant and directed the payment of interest as per section 10-B of the 1941 Act on the refund amount. These payments were also required to be made within the stipulated three-week period, effectively concluding the main application.

This comprehensive analysis covers the issues raised in the legal judgment, detailing the sequence of events, arguments presented, legal considerations, and the final directives issued by the Tribunal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates