9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncerned assessing authority for routine assessment in terms of the said decision. The assessing authority then assessed the tax liability for the period to be "nil" and declared the amount of Rs. 2,04,487 paid as tax to be the tax paid in excess. Though pursuant to same, a notice in form VII [prescribed under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941] was served on the applicant there was no order for refund of the money in cash or for deduction/adjustment of such excess amount against any tax, penalty or interest due in respect of other periods. Though the notice in form VII was issued showing the amount in excess, no refund payment order (cash) was issued in terms of section 12(1) read with rule 55(1A) of the 1941 Act. A large number of wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the amount paid in excess has arisen out of orders of reassessment under section 11 of the 1941 Act. The respondents further dispute the refundability of the amount on the ground that these are the amounts collected by the applicants of the two cases from the customers by way of tax without authority. However, during the hearing, the issue relating to collection as tax without authority has not been pursued. 5.. The issues before us are whether the applicants of the two cases before us are entitled to get refund of the amounts on the ground of their being taxes paid in excess and whether they are also entitled to interest on the ground of unlawful retention of the amounts by the respondents. 6.. In disputing the applicants' claim the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncumbent on the assessing authority to send along with the said notices the "refund payment orders (cash)" to the applicants of the two cases for the said amounts. But the said authority did not do so. It is surprising that the respondents even after filing of the two applications before this Tribunal now set up frivolous pleas to deny their liabilities to refund the amounts. 7.. According to the respondents, the applicants are not entitled to get any interest in terms of section 10B on the amounts of tax paid in excess, because the order dealing with such excess amount was made in course of assessment under section 11 and not under section 20 or 21. The respondents are again resorting to cavilling. It is an order under section 20 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
