9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... les tax under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. The grievance of the petitioner is that although the refund is due on merits, it is not being granted to the petitioner on the ground of unjust enrichment. Upon the making of an application for refund, the same has been disposed of by the Sales Tax Officer on the ground that as the dealer had collected the tax and deposited the same with the Revenue, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondents. Any such direction would amount to unjust enrichment of the respondents who are merely dealers and have passed on the burden to the purchasers/consumers. The dealers themselves have not suffered any loss. They merely passed on the liability. In such cases, this court has been refusing to refund the tax. See State of Madhya Pradesh v. Vyankatlal [1987] 64 STC 6 (SC); AIR 1985 SC 901 and Am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d agents, who have in turn passed on the burden to the consumer. Thus, having collected the octroi duty, there is no equity in favour of the IOC to claim a refund of the same. Learned counsel for the appellant also conceded that the question of refund, in the facts and circumstances of the case, does not arise and we, therefore, hold that the appellant shall not be entitled to any refund of the oc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of refund to the dealer as that would amount to the dealer's unjust enrichment which is not permissible. In respect of Central excise duty with regard to the issue of unjust enrichment, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India [1998] 111 STC 467 is also apposite. In this writ petition, it has not been controverted by the petitioner that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
