2021 (1) TMI 1156 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Grant of subsidy - time limitation - rejection on the ground that the claim was submitted after expiry of two years from the period to which the claim related - Tripura Industrial Investment Promotion Incentive Scheme, 2012 - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the petitioner is otherwise an eligible unit entitled to the refund of the value added tax under the said scheme, of course subject to fulfillment of the conditions contained therein. The scheme also envisages time limit for making application for refund. However, if the VAT department of the Government had delayed issuing necessary certificates of payment of tax to the petitioner, the application of the petitioner for refund cannot be rejected only on the ground of delay in making the same. Both the objections of the respondents that the scheme does not envisage extension of time for making application for refund and that the petitioner at the outset had not made out any grounds justifying delay, are turned down. On record, the petitioner has produced applications for grant of certificate by the VAT authorities and copies of reminders. However, that all these aspects be first examined by the District Industrial Centre. The District Industrial Centre shall consider the petitioner s further representations both dated 13.07.2020 copies of which are produced at Annexure-9 to the petition and the contents thereof - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to communication for subsidy under Tripura Industrial Investment Promotion Incentive Scheme, 2012; Rejection of refund applications due to delay in submission; Entitlement to subsidy under the scheme; Lack of provision for extension of time in the scheme; Delay in issuance of VAT payment certificates affecting refund application; Examination of petitioner's representations by District Industrial Centre.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested a communication dated 25.06.2020 and sought subsidy under the Tripura Industrial Investment Promotion Incentive Scheme, 2012. The petitioner, a private limited company engaged in manufacturing, applied for refund of VAT and other taxes paid to the State Government for the periods 01.01.2016 to 31.12.2016 and 01.01.2017 to 30.06.2017. The District Industries Centre rejected the applications citing expiry of the two-year claim period as the sole reason.

The petitioner explained the delay in filing for subsidy, attributing it to the VAT authority's failure to issue necessary payment certificates despite timely application. The respondents contended that the scheme did not allow for time extension or condonation of delay in refund applications. However, the Court acknowledged the petitioner's eligibility for refund under the scheme, subject to conditions. It highlighted that delay caused by one government department should not impede benefits under the scheme, especially when the petitioner provided detailed reasons for the delay in subsequent submissions.

The Court directed the District Industrial Centre to consider the petitioner's representations dated 13.07.2020, which outlined the delay due to non-issuance of VAT payment certificates. If the delay was indeed caused by the VAT authorities, the refund applications should be processed and refunds released. Conversely, if the delay could not be attributed to the VAT authority, a reasoned order must be provided to the petitioner within four months. The petition was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the situation by the District Industrial Centre.