2006 (7) TMI 608 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund pursuant to modified assessment
2. Refund of security deposit and interest

Refund Pursuant to Modified Assessment:
The petitioner had two grievances on refund and interest following a modified assessment. The appellate authority had passed orders regarding the modification in an exhibit. The contention of the learned Government Pleader for Taxes was based on rule 44 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963, stating that interest entitlement is within 90 days of receipt of authorization as per section 44. Section 44(1) mandates refund of excess tax paid by the dealer at final assessment. Sub-section (2) requires the assessing authority to effect refund upon receipt of an order from an appellate or revisional authority. A previous case, Abraham Chacko v. Addl. Sales Tax Officer [2006] 1 KLT 186, held that non-passing of an order as per section 44 or rule 43 read with rule 44 does not affect the assessee's entitlement to interest. The court declared that the petitioner is entitled to interest under section 44(4) from the expiry of 90 days from the date of the appellate order.

Refund of Security Deposit and Interest:
Regarding the claim for refund of the security deposit, an order dated November 4, 1985, confirmed the petitioner's entitlement to a refund of Rs. 18,080. The Revenue was found to have unjustly held the deposit despite the petitioner's entitlement to a refund. The court ruled that the petitioner should be granted interest at a rate of 10% under section 44(4) from June 16, 1998, in respect of the amount of Rs. 18,080. The court ordered the disbursement of the amount within three months from the date of the judgment.

Conclusion:
The writ petition was disposed of, and an order on C.M.P. No. 53095 of 2002 in O.P. No. 31401 of 2002 was dismissed.