9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 929 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWrong calculation of VAT refund - Delhi VAT Act - HELD THAT - The amount of interest on the refund amount has to be calculated by the respondent as per the provisions of law, especially, under Section 42 of the Act, 2004. A detailed speaking order dated 29th August, 2019 has been passed by the Additional Commissioner. The interest on the refund amount has already been directed to be paid @6% for the period 02.03.2015 to 20.08.2019 which comes to ₹1,67,98,822/-. The dispute raised by the petitioner in this petition about the calculation of the interest is an appealable order under Section 42 of the Act, 2004 and as an efficacious remedy is available with the petitioner, we do not deem it fit to exercise our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the prayer made in this writ petition. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to order calculating interest on VAT refund amount. Analysis: The writ petition challenged an order dated 29th August, 2019, regarding the calculation of interest on a VAT refund amount. The petitioner contended that the interest was incorrectly calculated by the respondents. It was highlighted that a previous writ petition, W.P.(C) 7842/2018, was allowed by the Court on 7th August, 2019, directing the refund of the amount under the Delhi Value Added Tax, 2004, along with interest under Section 42 of the Act. The petitioner argued that the Additional Commissioner did not properly appreciate the interest calculation as directed in the previous order. The respondent, however, argued that the impugned order was appealable under Section 42 of the Act, and there was no specific direction in the previous judgment to pay a particular amount of interest on the refund. The respondent asserted that the interest was calculated at 6% for the relevant period, amounting to ?1,67,98,822. The Court noted that the dispute regarding interest calculation was appealable under Section 42 of the Act, and since an alternative remedy was available, the Court declined to intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of based on the above observations.
|
