9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) of the TNGST Act, 1959 is without jurisdiction inasmuch as the deferral agreement entered between the petitioner and the 1st respondent on 28.06.1996 has not been cancelled till date and therefore in terms of the following decisions of the Court, the petitioner is entitled for the relief in the present writ petition. "M/s.Sun Gas Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT), and others in W.P.No.19411 of 2010. Srinivasa Steel Vs The Joint Commissioner (CT) and others in W.P.(MD).Nos.12837 to 12847 of 2015" 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the above two decisions, the Court has considered the decisions rendered earlier in M/S.Kalpatharu Spinning Mills Vs Commercial Tax Officer in W.P.(MD).No. 19060 of 2009, dated 01.12.2010 wherein, the Court has held that interest is to be collected only from the date of repayment and not from the date of violation or cancellation of the agreement. Reference was made to the following passage from the respective decisions. "3.4. In support of her contention, the petitioner relied on M/S.Kalpatharu Spinning Mills Vs Commercial Tax Officer made in W.P. (MD).No.19060 dated 01.12.2010 and Amutha Mills Private Limited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 4,59,411/- 2002-2003 15,228/- 01.04.2011 26.09.2019 9 years, 5 Months and 26 Days Rs. 31,027/- 6.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above calculation is without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in the light of the law settled by the Court in the abovementioned four decisions. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the claim of the departments seeking to recover the interest from 01.04.2000, 15.07.2001, 13.07.2003, 12.10.2006 is unsustainable and therefore this writ petition is deserves to be allowed. 7.The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the decision rendered in the context of the proceeding before the Settlement Commission under the Act and the law clarified by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No. 1462 of 2006 (M/S.Amutha Mills Private Limited., Annur, Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Zone-III, Coimbatore and others) dated 06.12.2006, which has been followed in the subsequent decision of this Court in W.P.No.19060 of 2009, (S.R.Subramaniam, M/S.Sree Kalpatharu Spinning and Weaving Mills Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Zone-III, Coimbatore) to the effect that penal interest if any s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a failure to pay the tax in time and therefore interest has to be repaid as a consequence without any notice. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhai Jaspal Singh and another Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and others reported in (2010) 35 VST 456 (SC) has held that interest on sales tax becomes due on repayment of tax in time and there is no need to issue a demand notice. The learned counsel for the official respondents further submits that as per Section 24 (3) of the Act, the interest has to be paid by the petitioner as under:- Year Tax due Rs. Due Date Payment Date No of days delay Interest Rs. 1998-1999 4,21,534/- 01.04.2000 26.09.2019 7147 20,08,469/- 1999-2000 3,75,704/- 15.07.2001 26.09.2019 6647 16,64,870/- 2000-2001 1,82,487/- 13.03.2003 26.09.2019 6041 7,34,936/- 2002-2003 15,228/- 12.10.2006 26.09.2019 4732 48,039/- 11.The learned counsel for the respondents has also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in the case of Star Paper Mills Limited Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2006) 148 STC 144 (SC), wherein it was held tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 51 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. In this connection, a reference was made to the following orders of this Court, wherein, the writ petition was dismissed by asking the petitioners therein to workout their remedy before the appellate authority. "i) Hon'ble High Court Madras in Writ Appeal No.4 of 2019, dated 09.01.2019 ii) Hon'ble High Court Madras in Writ Appeal Nos.652 to 655 of 2019, dated 28.02.2019. iii) Hon'ble High Court Madras in Writ Appeal Nos.1240 and 1241 of 2019, dated 20.06.2019. iv) Hon'ble High Court Madurai decision in Writ petition No.22361 of 2016, dated 19.02.2019 v) High Court Madras in Writ appeal No.196 of 2020 dated 10.02.2020. vi) High Court Madras in Writ appeal No.198 of 2020 dated 10.02.2020 vii) High Court Madras in Writ appeal No.3268, 3171 of 2019 Writ appeal 3168 to 3171 dated 18.02.2020 viii) High Court Madras in Writ 13729 of 2016 dated 16.07.2020 ix) In the High Court of Judicature at Madras W.P.No.17737 of 2018 dated 15.10.2020 x) The Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.D.Audikesavalu W.P.No.31116 of 2018 dated 10.12.2020 read Supreme Court of India in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada Vs Glaxo Smith Kline ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, vide letter dated 28.02.2014 bearing Letter No.Drafting Cell-I/28518/2012, has clarified that if violation happens during the second tenure, interest will start from the date of violation or from the date of default in payment of dues. If this concession is to be extended, the petitioner will be liable to pay the interest from the actual date of each default. In other words, the petitioner will be liable to pay interest for each of the period as per Clause 5.1 of the Eligibility Certificate. 22.The intention of the Government is evident that though the agreement and the eligibility criteria contemplate a complete recovery of the amount as if there is no deferral at all, the revenue would be satisfied if proportionate interest is paid from the date of each default. Therefore, I am inclined to dispose of these writ petitions by remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent to apply the conditions provided in Paragraph No.4 of the circular/clarification of the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, vide letter dated 28.02.2014 bearing Letter No.Drafting Cell-I/28518/2012 to the facts of the case and requantify the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
