9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (4) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dents, was not clear and therefore, the petitioner realised tax under the Act from the said respondent. Upon the representation made by respondent No. 3 to the Government, it was clarified that the sales to respondent No. 3 were not taxable. The petitioner, therefore, had to refund the amount to respondent No. 3 realised from the latter for the assessment year 1983-84. 3. The petitioner, having refunded the tax to respondent No. 3, sought refund from the assessing officer, but its request was rejected by the assessing officer by the impugned order on the ground that under sub-section (3) of Section 29-A of the Act, the refund could be made only to the person from whom, the dealer had actually realised the amount and to no other person. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. Notice was issued to respondent No. 3 by registered post with acknowledgment due fixing today's date. Neither unserved A. D. nor the registered envelop has been received back and, therefore, the respondent No. 3 is deemed to have been sufficiently with the notice. None has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 3 and, therefore averments, made in the writ petition by the petitioner, are not controverted by respondent No. 3. This being so, the plea that the letter dated 24-6-1991, Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition had been issued by respondent No. 3 to the assessing officer cannot be doubted. In this letter, respondent No. 3 clearly admitted having received an amount of ₹ 48,863.85 from the petitioner towards the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 3 requested the assessing officer vide letter dated 24-0-91 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) to refund the amount to the petitioner on its behalf, we are of the view that the petitioner will be treated as an agent of respondent No. 3. 9. In view of the facts and in the circumstances of the case and materials brought on record by the petitioner, it cannot be said that the petitioner falls under the category of 'other person' within the meaning of sub-section (3) of Section 29-A. Respondent No. 3 can either approach directly to the assessing officer to take refund of tax wrongly realised or may depute a duly authorised agent to take refund of the amount. Instead of approaching directly to the assessing officer, respondent No. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
