9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8.05.2003 which was affirmed vide order dated 05.12.2003 pursuant to the show cause notice dated 04.05.1998 would not mean that the petitioner is not entitled to interest during the aforesaid period. Merely because the Department had revised the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated 20.01.1997 in AP.No.CST 188/95 would not mean the petitioner is not entitled to interest. Once the order of the Joint Commissioner has been restored, the petitioner is entitled to interest as calculated by the petitioner which was also confirmed by the 2nd respondent in its communication dated 30.11.2021. The respondents are directed to refund the interest amount of Rs. 6,21,919.74/- after adjusting any amount if any paid towards interest during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls are charging 24% for belated payment. Relevant portion of the order reads as under: 4. Since, the order directing to refund the amount is not stayed or the order passed on which basis the refund order is given also not stayed, the petitioner is entitled for refund. Hence, the respondent is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 2,42,405/- within a period of one month from the date of production of this order with interest at 12% per annum from 28.01.1998 till the date of payment as the Sales Tax officials are charging 24% for belated payment. 5. Giving effect to the order of this Court dated 13.02.2003 in W.P.No.10928 of 1998, the respondent Commercial Tax Department also refunded a sum of Rs. 2,22,818/- to the petitioner by commun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P.No.35839 of 2003 was allowed and the order dated 20.01.1997 of the Appellate Commissioner was restored. In the light of the order passed in W.P.No.35839 of 2003, W.P.No.9363 of 2004 was closed. The Court also held that the petitioner is entitled for interest not only on 50% of the amount paid back by the petitioner but also interest as was ordered in W.P.No.10928 of 1998 vide order dated 13.02.2006. 10. In this connection, it will be useful to refer paragaph Nos.29 to 31, wherein it has been held as under: 29. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, reliance has been placed on the order passed by the Joint Commissioner dated 28.05.2003, restoring the original assessment order and therefore, it is submitted that prayer for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e direction to pay the interest at 12% per annum. 30. For all the above reasons, W.P.No.6254 of 2004 is allowed and the respondent is directed to refund 50% of the excess tax, which was paid back by the petitioner, pursuant to the order of the Joint Commissioner dated 28.05.2003, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy this order and then re-compute the interest and intimate the petitioner about the interest, which is payable within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the computation, it will be open to the petitioner to point out any discrepancies, if any, within 7 days thereafter and intimate the Department after which, the Department shall pay the interest amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, after questioning the aforesaid letter / communication on 30.11.2021, the 2nd respondent has issued revised communication dated 21.12.2021 bearing reference Rc.299/2021/A3. The revised calculation that has been given along with the aforesaid communication reads as under: INTEREST CALCULATION STATEMENT No. of days Percentage of Interest Refund Amount Total Interest as on 21.03.2003 1867 12% Rs.2,22,818-00 Rs.1,36,768-00 Date of receipt of order copy 19.04.2021 90 days 90 days To be paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no merits in the contention of the Commercial Tax Department that the petitioner is not entitled to the interest during the pendency of the proceeding before this Court in W.P.No.35839 of 2003. Merely because the order dated 20.01.1997 of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was revised by the Joint Commissioner vide order dated 28.05.2003 which was affirmed vide order dated 05.12.2003 pursuant to the show cause notice dated 04.05.1998 would not mean that the petitioner is not entitled to interest during the aforesaid period. Merely because the Department had revised the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated 20.01.1997 in AP.No.CST 188/95 would not mean the petitioner is not entitled to interest. Once the order of the Joint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
