2010 (3) TMI 1064 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Liability of interest on final assessment - Levy of sales tax on bags - Held that - it is well settled law that assessee cannot predict the final assessment when he files his return bonafidely paying tax which is due according to the assessee. If assessee does not pay tax at the time of filing the return on the items raising bonafide question about the levying of tax thereon before the assessing authority he cannot be held liable to pay interest from the date of return but shall be liable to pay interest subsequent the date of assessment holding the assessee liable to pay tax - the petitioner shall be liable to pay interest subsequent to the period of assessment order and not for the period prior to the assessment order - petition allowed - decided partly in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order on sales tax levied on bags, Liability to pay interest on tax amount.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the assessment order dated 27.2.1989, where the Assessing Authority wrongly levied sales tax on bags used for selling foodgrains. The petitioner argued that as foodgrains could only be sold in bags, the bags should be exempt from sales tax. The petitioner contended that interest should not be charged from the date of the original return but only after the final assessment of tax.

During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel focused on the issue of charging interest, citing the judgment in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer and Frick India Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana, where it was established that interest should only be charged post the determination of tax under the final assessment. The counsel emphasized that an assessee cannot foresee the final assessment at the time of filing the return and should not be held liable for interest from the return date if the tax is paid in good faith.

The court acknowledged the legal principle that interest cannot be charged before the assessment order, as per the decisions of the Apex Court. The respondent's counsel agreed with this interpretation and conceded that the petitioner should not be liable to pay interest for the period preceding the assessment order. Consequently, the court disposed of the writ petition, directing that the petitioner would only be liable to pay interest from the period subsequent to the assessment order, not prior to it.

In conclusion, the court's judgment clarified that the petitioner was not obligated to pay interest for the period preceding the assessment order, aligning with the legal precedent set by the Apex Court. The writ petition was resolved with the specified directive regarding the liability for interest on the tax amount.