2016 (9) TMI 1248 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Refund of the excess tax which has been collected for the Assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 - order of assessment already passed granting refund, refund vouchers pending - Held that - This Court would wish to point out that the zeal of the Department in collecting the tax should also apply to cases where the refunds are to be granted. When the order of Assessment has resulted in a positive order in favour of the assessee as a result of which, whatever excess taxes collected or adjusted should be refunded, the Authority should be prompt in effecting refund. Therefore, it appears that there is no valid reason for the respondents to keep the petitioner s requests dated 23.09.2015 and 05.11.2015, for refund vouchers pending for almost one year. There will be a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner s representation dated 16.08.2016 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four week - petition dismissed - decided in favor of petitioner-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in considering refund request by the tax authority.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Madras addressed the issue of delay in the consideration of a refund request by the tax authority. The petitioner had sought a direction for the Assistant Commissioner to consider their representation dated 16.08.2016, requesting a refund of excess tax collected for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13. The court noted that the petitioner's entitlement to the refund was not in dispute as the assessment orders had resulted in a refund. Despite submitting representations in 2015 and subsequent letters in 2016, the respondents had not passed any orders on the refund request, prompting the petitioner to approach the court.

The court emphasized the importance of prompt action by the tax authority in effecting refunds when assessments result in a positive outcome for the assessee. It highlighted that the same diligence shown in tax collection should also be applied to cases where refunds are due. The court noted that there was no valid reason for the respondents to delay the processing of the petitioner's refund requests for almost a year. Consequently, the court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2016 and to pass orders on merits and in accordance with the law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the court's order.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition, providing the direction for the tax authority to expedite the consideration of the refund request. The judgment underscored the obligation of the tax authority to promptly process refund claims in cases where assessments result in excess taxes being collected, emphasizing the need for efficiency and adherence to legal requirements in such matters.