2021 (9) TMI 1234 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Refund of tax alongwith interest - tax periods, 4th Quarter of 2008-2009, for all the quarters of 2009-2010, 4th Quarter of 2010-2011 for 1st Quarter of 2011-2012 - DVAT Act - HELD THAT - The concerned Respondent Authority is directed to decide the claim, as and when the same is preferred by the Petitioner, for refund as stated in the memo of this petition, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, Government policies applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case and on the basis of the evidence on record and also keeping in mind the law of limitation for getting the refund and also keeping in mind the principles of unjust enrichment . The decision shall be taken by the concerned Respondent Authorities as stated, as expeditiously as possible and practicable - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund claim under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act.
2. Interest on the refund claimed amount.
3. Compliance with statutory provisions and circulars.
4. Principles of unjust enrichment.

Analysis:

Refund Claim under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the setting aside of an order and issuance of refunds totaling Rs. 2,75,136/-, Rs. 13,02,811/-, Rs. 71,384/-, and Rs. 1,17,646/- for specific tax periods under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act. The court directed the concerned respondent authority to decide on the refund claim in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and government policies, considering evidence on record and the law of limitation for refunds.

Interest on the Refund Claimed Amount:
The petitioner also requested interest at 6% under Section 42 of the DVAT Act on the claimed refund amounts. The court acknowledged the petitioner's right to claim interest under the said section and emphasized that the claim is unaffected by the operation of another section. The court directed the authorities to consider the interest aspect while processing the refund claim expeditiously.

Compliance with Statutory Provisions and Circulars:
The court highlighted the importance of compliance with statutory provisions and circulars issued by the authorities. It directed the respondent authority to decide on the refund claim based on the evidence on record and in line with the law, rules, regulations, and government policies applicable to the case. The court stressed the need to consider the law of limitation for refunds and the principles of unjust enrichment as established by a previous Supreme Court ruling.

Principles of Unjust Enrichment:
The court specifically mentioned the principles of "unjust enrichment" as elucidated by a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court in a previous case. It emphasized the importance of considering these principles while deciding on the refund claim to ensure fairness and compliance with legal standards. The court disposed of the writ petition with these directions and observations, aiming for an expeditious resolution of the matter.