9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner that the issue of refund of excess tax paid by the petitioner will be considered after finalisation of the assessments. Heard Mr. R. Senniappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.C. Mani Bharathi, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), for the respondent. By an order dated September 29, 2003, the Commercial Tax Officer, Annathanapatty Circle, Salem, finalised the assessment for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t time, assessments for the years 2002-03 and 2003-04 were pending finalisation. Therefore, the respondent has taken a stand in the impugned order that only after finalisation of the assessment for those years, the question of refund will be taken up. Aggrieved by such a stand taken by the respondent, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. The impugned order makes it clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. As a matter of fact, the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act ) does not provide for retention of excess tax, in anticipation of future liability. This is why section 24(4) of the Act provides for payment of interest on belated refund of excess tax. Therefore, taking into account the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
