2017 (11) TMI 330 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Exemption by way of refund of Earned Input Tax Credit - Certificate of Entitlement - Section 42(4A) of the Act - case of petitioner is that In the assessment order which is passed on 8.4.2013 there is no discussion about Certificate of Entitlement by the Assessing Authority, of which the petitioner is affected - Held that - With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the writ petition is finally disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under Section 55 of the U.P. VAT Act or any other provision of law, which entitled the petitioner to approach the appellate authority to raise its grievance with regard to claim passed by the amended order by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax dated 10.2.2016 allegedly entitling the petitioner company for the refund, so as claimed - since this writ petition has been entertained in the year 2013 on 27.5.2013 and was pending before this Court, there would be delay caused to approach the appellate authority on the part of the petitioner - we direct the appellate authority to entertain the appeal, if the same is filed within a period of three weeks from today, without going into the question of limitation.

Issues:
1. Refund of a substantial amount for the assessment year 2009-10.
2. Modification/quashing of the order refusing the refundable amount.
3. Interpretation of provisions of U.P. VAT Act regarding entitlement for exemption by way of refund.
4. Validity of Certificate of Entitlement issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax.
5. Right to approach the appellate authority under Section 55 of the U.P. VAT Act.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a refund of ?10,92,26,607 for the assessment year 2009-10 and challenged the order refusing the refund. The petitioner's counsel argued that the company had made additional investments in a manufacturing facility for motorcycles under a new foreign collaboration approved by the Government of India. The Eligibility Certificate issued under the U.P. Trade Tax Act indicated discrepancies in the fixed capital investment. The petitioner contended that they were entitled to an enhanced refund based on the Certificate of Entitlement issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Lucknow.

2. The petitioner relied on Section 42 of the U.P. VAT Act, particularly Sections 42(4), 42(4A), 42(5), and 42(7), to support their claim for exemption by way of refund of Earned Input Tax Credit. The Certificate of Entitlement was crucial in determining the refund amount. The Commissioner's amendment to the Certificate increased the refundable amount, leading to the petitioner's claim for the enhanced refund. The assessment order did not address the Certificate of Entitlement, prompting the petitioner to file the writ petition.

3. The High Court directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under Section 55 of the U.P. VAT Act to address their grievance regarding the amended order by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax. Despite the potential delay in filing the appeal, the Court acknowledged the petitioner's existing petition since 2013 and allowed the appeal to be entertained within three weeks without considering the limitation issue. The Court emphasized the importance of providing the petitioner with a fair opportunity to appeal the decision.

4. In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the significance of adherence to statutory provisions under the U.P. VAT Act concerning refunds and entitlements. The Court's decision to allow the petitioner to appeal, despite possible delays, demonstrated a commitment to ensuring procedural fairness and access to legal remedies for aggrieved parties in tax matters. The detailed analysis of the provisions and the Court's directions provided clarity on the legal framework governing refund claims and the appellate process under the U.P. VAT Act.

← Previous Next →