2010 (8) TMI 884 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Justification of forfeiture upheld by the Tribunal.
2. Refunding tax collected by the assessee to its customer after a period of two years.
3. Interpretation of the apex court judgment in R. S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat v. Ajit Mills Limited [1977] 40 STC 497 (SC).

Analysis:

Issue 1: Justification of Forfeiture
The Tribunal had referred the question of law regarding the justification of upholding forfeiture by the assessing officer. The Tribunal upheld the forfeiture of the tax amount collected by the assessee from its customers, even though the tax was refunded to the customer after a period of two years from the date of collection. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that the tax was not leviable.

Issue 2: Refunding Tax After Two Years
The petitioner, relying on the apex court judgment in R. S. Joshi v. Ajit Mills Limited, argued that the assessee had the right to refund the tax collected under a mistake of law. The petitioner contended that the assessing officer had no authority to forfeit the amount, and the Tribunal erred in confirming the forfeiture. The High Court observed that there is no time limit prescribed for refunding tax erroneously collected, and once the tax amount is refunded to the customer, forfeiture cannot be justified.

Issue 3: Interpretation of Apex Court Judgment
The High Court, after considering the arguments presented, concluded that the tax was indeed recovered by the assessee under a mistake of law. The Court emphasized that there is no prohibition on refunding the amount to the customer upon realizing the mistaken collection of tax. The Court further highlighted that once the tax amount is refunded to the customer, forfeiture of the refunded amount cannot be upheld. Therefore, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, holding that the order of the Tribunal justifying the forfeiture was not justified.

In conclusion, the High Court answered the referred question in the negative, favoring the assessee and rejecting the forfeiture of the tax amount. The reference was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.