9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (7) TMI 4 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxInterest from the date of refund order in terms of Sec. 13A of Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - HELD THAT - No question of law would arise for consideration in terms of Sec. 23 (1) of the Act. U/s 23 (1) of the Act, it is open for the petitioner to prefer petition to the High Court against the order of the Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal has either failed to decide or decided erroneously any question of law. Admittedly, appeal filed against collection of excess tax is allowed by the first appellate authority under order dated 24.03.2012 and in terms of the said order, voucher is raised for refund on 20.09.2013. In terms of Sec. 13A of the Act the petitioner herein would be entitled for interest in terms of Sec. 13A (b). The Tribunal where the petitioner had prayed to read down Sec. 13A of the Act, has rightly answered stating that it is outside the purview of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and it was also outside the scope of the appeal. There is no merit in any of the contentions raised by the petitioner - Petition dismissed.
Issues:
1. Entitlement to interest on refund of excess tax under Sec. 13A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. 2. Jurisdiction of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in deciding on interest payment. 3. Interpretation of Sec. 13A of the Act in relation to interest payment. 4. Application of precedents and relevant legal provisions. 5. Overall consideration of all issues raised in the case. Analysis: The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture and sale of wooden goods, challenged the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes regarding the entitlement to interest on refund of excess tax for the assessment year 1980-81. The petitioner contended that interest should be paid from the date of collecting excess tax. The petitioner raised several questions of law, including the Tribunal's failure to decide on issues correctly and the application of relevant legal provisions. The petitioner argued that interest should be granted from the date of collecting excess tax, emphasizing the erroneous decisions of the appellate authority and the Tribunal. The petitioner questioned the Tribunal's jurisdiction and interpretation of Sec. 13A of the Act, particularly in relation to interest payment and the reading down of the provision. Additionally, the petitioner raised concerns about the interest rate and the application of precedents by the Tribunal. The respondent, supported by the Additional Advocate General, contended that the Act provides for interest payment under Sec. 13A, and there was no challenge to this provision. Therefore, the authorities were obligated to pay interest as per the statutory provision. The respondent argued against granting interest from the date of payment of excess tax and urged for the dismissal of the revision petition. After hearing both parties, the Court found that no question of law arose for consideration under Sec. 23 (1) of the Act. The Court noted that the petitioner was entitled to interest from the date of the order passed by the first appellate authority, in accordance with Sec. 13A of the Act. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the jurisdiction and interpretation of Sec. 13A, stating that the petitioner's contentions lacked merit. Consequently, the Court rejected the petition, emphasizing the absence of any legal questions for consideration. In conclusion, the Court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioner was entitled to interest as per Sec. 13A of the Act and that no legal issues warranted further consideration. The Court disposed of any pending applications related to the case.
|
