9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 3 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxSeeking grant of refund alongwith interest - composite scheme - time limit of assessment - re-assessment expired long time back - HELD THAT - After filing of the annual return, the time limit for assessment and re-assessment under the VAT Act had expired and no assessment or re-assessment is pending at this stage, we allow this writ petition with the direction to the respondents to grant the refund of Rs.2,78,129/- due as per the self-assessment return under the VAT Act for the year 2007-2008 along with statutory interest payable on such refund within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
1. Refund claim under VAT Act for the year 2007-2008 not granted. 2. Applicability of time limits for assessment and re-assessment. 3. Legal basis for granting refund with proportionate interest. 4. Interpretation of relevant case law for similar refund claims. Issue 1: Refund claim under VAT Act for the year 2007-2008 not granted. The petitioner, engaged in works contracts, sought a refund of Rs.2,78,129/- for the year 2007-2008 under the VAT Act. The delay in providing the tax deduction certificate by the contractee led to the petitioner being initially deemed ineligible for the refund. Despite multiple reminders and requests for adjustment of the outstanding refund in the assessment, the respondent authorities concluded all assessments without granting the refund. The petitioner approached the High Court through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the respondents to immediately release the outstanding refund amount along with interest. Issue 2: Applicability of time limits for assessment and re-assessment. The petitioner's counsel argued that all time limits for assessment and re-assessment had expired, making the petitioner entitled to the refund with proportionate interest. The respondent authorities did not contest the expiration of assessment/reassessment time limits and acknowledged that no such orders were pending. The Court considered the absence of pending assessments or reassessments under the VAT Act for the relevant period, which led to the conclusion that the petitioner should be granted the refund as per the self-assessment return for the year 2007-2008. Issue 3: Legal basis for granting refund with proportionate interest. The Court, after considering the submissions from both parties, including the petitioner's reliance on specific case law, decided in favor of the petitioner. The judgment highlighted that the time limit for assessment and reassessment under the VAT Act had lapsed, and no assessments were pending. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to release the refund amount of Rs.2,78,129/- along with statutory interest payable on such refund within six weeks from the date of the order. Issue 4: Interpretation of relevant case law for similar refund claims. The petitioner's counsel referenced two decisions of the Court, namely Malhotra Graphics Thr. Sanjay Malhotra vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. and Torrent Power Ltd. vs. State of Gujarat, to support the claim for the refund. The Court acknowledged the relevance of these precedents in similar cases and found that the present matter aligned with the principles established in those judgments. The Court's decision to grant the refund with interest was influenced by the legal reasoning and outcomes in these prior cases, ensuring consistency and adherence to established legal principles. In conclusion, the High Court of Gujarat, presided over by Honourable Mrs. Justice Mauna M. Bhatt, allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner, directing the respondents to grant the outstanding refund amount of Rs.2,78,129/- for the year 2007-2008 under the VAT Act, along with statutory interest, within six weeks from the date of the order. The judgment emphasized the expiration of assessment and reassessment time limits, the absence of pending assessments, and the alignment of the case with relevant legal precedents to justify the decision in favor of the petitioner.
|
