9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was that the original assessment order stood restored and continues till date since no fresh order of revision has been passed on remand - it is evident that when an order of assessment, re- assessment, rectification or revision of an assessment is made following an order of any court, the same is required to be made within three years from the date of receipt of such order by the prescribed or revising authority. The respondent No. 2 directed to refund Rs. 40,00,000/- to the petitioner with interest at 6% per cent. per annum to be computed from June 21,2017 when the petitioner first raised the demand for refund. Let the refund along with interest be paid by respondent No. 2 to the petitioner within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petition disposed off. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, 2012, no order of revision was passed by respondent No. 2 thereafter. In the meanwhile, the petitioner submitted application dated June 21, 2017 before the second respondent stating that following the order passed by this court, the initial order of revision dated July 29, 2011 was set aside where after no fresh order of revision was passed. Since the limitation period of three years provided under section 37 of the VAT Act had expired, the petitioner sought for refund of the amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- as paid by it. This was reiterated by subsequent applications dated July 21, 2017 and November 8, 2021. 9. As there was no response, present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above. Notice in this case was issued on January 27, 2022. 10. When the court put a query to Mr. Raji Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents as to whether the respondents would like to file counter affidavit, he submits that in view of the admitted facts, filing of counter- affidavit may not be necessary. In this regard, he submits that he has written instructions of the respondents. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that following the order passed by this co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration of the court. 15. As narrated above, there is no dispute as to the facts. Petitioner was initially assessed on June 8, 2009. On the ground that the assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, revisional order was passed under section 32 of the VAT Act on July 29, 2011 enhancing the levy of tax. The revisional order came to be challenged by the petitioner before this court in W. P. No. 22880 of 2011 . This court by order dated August 30, 2011(Kirby Building Systems India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner (CT) [2012] 56 VST 230 (AP)) allowed the writ petition and set aside the revisional order dated July 29, 2011. The matter was remanded back to the revisional authority to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. Though respondent No. 2 had issued notices dated November 10, 2011 and March 24, 2012 for hearing, which was attended to by the petitioner, no order of revision came to be passed. 16. When the revisional order was set aside by this court, the consequence was that the original assessment order stood restored and continues till date since no fresh order of revision has been passed on remand. 17. Section 37 of the VAT Act deals with limitation in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two tranches though under protest. Insofar the levy of tax under the assessment order dated June 8, 2009 is concerned, the same has already been paid by the petitioner. 20. As to the status of the quantum of amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- paid by the petitioner, this aspect was gone into by a division bench of the Gujarat High Court in Torrent Power Ltd. [2020] 72 GSTR 289 (Guj). It has been held as follows (pages 303 and 304 in 72 GSTR) : "In the present case, the petitioners have made an application for refund for the first time on August 11, 2015 wherein it was stated that the assessment for the year 2006-2007 under section 34 of the GVAT Act was completed in February 2011 accepting the facts and figures as per annual return and VAT audit report. In August 2013, flying squad issued notice in form 401 seeking details of amount collected towards maintenance of fly ash collection system. The petitioners voluntarily deposited the amount towards tax and interest on administrative charges collected for maintaining fly ash collection system under pro test for FYs 2006-2007 to 2010-2011 for five years. It was conveyed to the petitioners by the flying squad that the jurisdictional wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
