9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1045X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r in Form 27 or subsequent to the said order. The respondents are not justified in linking both the proceedings. After the issuance of Form 27 in which it has been clearly recorded that the appellant had paid excess tax, it is the duty of the department to refund the said amount and if the amount is not refunded within time, the appellant / assessee would be entitled to interest on the same as the department seeks to recover alleged tax dues with interest. The same principle will equally apply to the department as well when they have withheld the refund though Form 27 was issued as early as on 4th August, 2016. The sanction and payment of the excess tax collected is an independent proceedings to the proceedings that the department ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de an oral submission that the appellant is due and payable a sum of Rs.1,22,55,623.45 being dues under the WBVAT Act as well as CST Act and an interest thereon of Rs.96,99,566/-. From the order passed by the Tribunal, it is seen that no affidavit or document was produced to show that how the amount was due and payable, whether an assessment order had been passed and on what date order was passed and when it was served on the appellant etc. The State requested time to ascertain as to whether any appeal has been filed as against the order against the WBVAT Act and CST Act. The matter was adjourned to 30th November, 2018. 3. Thereafter, it appears that the matter was adjourned from time to time but as of now the Tribunal is not functional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld have been well open to the writ Court to grant permission to the appellant to withdraw the proceedings before the Tribunal by making necessary submission in the writ petition. In any event, there is nothing on record to point out that there was an order of assessment under both the enactments, which had culminated in a demand. There is also nothing placed on record before the Tribunal or before this Court to show that the demand was pending prior to the issuance of the refund order in Form 27 or subsequent to the said order. The respondents are not justified in linking both the proceedings. After the issuance of Form 27 in which it has been clearly recorded that the appellant had paid excess tax, it is the duty of the department to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
