2009 (10) TMI 869

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... quash the endorsements dated March 30, 2009 and May 20, 2009 as per annexures E and G to the writ petition refusing to pay interest on delayed refund. The petitioner contends that during the assessment year 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 they made certain purchases from a company called M/s. Kaytee Switch Gear Limited. On the purchases made by the petitioner-company, they have paid input tax at 12.5 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imited during the assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. Further it is not in dispute that the seller of the petitioner-company collected input tax at 12.5 per cent on the value of the goods. Further it is not in dispute that the seller of the petitioner-company who collected the input tax from the petitioner-company failed and neglected to remit the same to the respondents within the time .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the input tax at four per cent and consequent interest on delayed payment, penalty and are liable to refund the excess input tax together with interest as per section 50 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with rule 128 of the Rules. The respondents are not entitled to retain the interest collected from the seller on the refunded input tax. For the reasons stated above, the following: .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X