9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2002 (3) TMI 897 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax
Issues:
Non-payment of refund to petitioners, interpretation of relevant laws for refund disbursement, authority's refusal to refund through power of attorney-holder, dispute over payment of interest and costs with refund. Analysis: The judgment addresses a writ petition involving 42 petitioners affected by non-payment of refund. The petitioners, represented by a power of attorney-holder, sought refund disbursement through her, which the authority refused. The respondents argued that letters sent for refund were returned as "not claimed," highlighting the requirement for refund to be made to the dealer who paid the tax. The court examined the provisions of the Taxes on Entry of Goods into Calcutta Metropolitan Area Act, 1972, and emphasized the importance of proper documentation for refund disbursement. Regarding the power of attorney-holder's authority to claim refunds, the court considered the Evidence Act's section 85, presuming the validity of documents executed before a notary public. The definition of "dealer" under the Act was crucial, encompassing individuals handling goods delivery on behalf of the dealer. The court emphasized the broad interpretation of "dealer" for tax recovery purposes, ensuring accountability and proper representation for refund disbursement. The judgment clarified that disbursement should be made to the power of attorney-holder or the person identified by them as the dealer, following the provisions of section 19 and rule 25(5) of the Act. The responsibility of ensuring proper disbursement lies with the power of attorney-holder, with a stipulated timeframe for completion. Additionally, the court settled the issue of interest and costs with the refund, ruling that interest must be paid at a simple rate from the date of the Supreme Court's order, emphasizing the standard practice of granting interest along with refunds. In conclusion, the writ petition was disposed of, with instructions for supplying certified copies of the judgment to the parties. The judgment provided clarity on refund disbursement procedures, the role of the power of attorney-holder, and the entitlement to interest along with the principal sum in such cases.
|
