9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd contend that there is no necessity to refund the same. If the actual tax assessed from the petitioner is much less than the amount which the petitioner had deposited at the time of filing the appeal and seeking stay, retention of the balance after the assessing officer, post remand, reduced the demand drastically, would undoubtedly amount to unjust enrichment on the part of the respondents and would be violative of Article 14 and Article 265 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are directed to refund the amounts deposited by the petitioner after adjusting the same towards the tax finally assessed post remand by the assessing authority for the Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-15 with interest at the rate of 9% pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Jharkhand VAT Act along with an application seeking stay of the amounts assessed under the said assessment orders. 4. On 13.02.2019, in the stay applications filed in the respective appeals, the appellate authority passed orders stating that if the appellant deposits 15% of the demanded amount by 25.02.2019, it would result in a stay of both the Assessment Order and the demand notice. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner complied with the said order within the time prescribed and deposited Rs. 24,000,00/- and Rs. 26,00,000/- respectively. Ultimately, the appellate authority remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in respect of both assessment years. 6. Thereafter, the petitioner requested the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand, after the appeal is decided, and the matter is remitted back, and after the assessing officer passes a fresh assessment order post remand. 10. The respondents cannot retain the amounts deposited by the petitioner pursuant to condition imposed by the appellate authority for stay of the assessment order and contend that there is no necessity to refund the same. If the actual tax assessed from the petitioner is much less than the amount which the petitioner had deposited at the time of filing the appeal and seeking stay, retention of the balance after the assessing officer, post remand, reduced the demand drastically, would undoubtedly amount to unjust enrichment on the part of the respondents and would be violative of Article 14 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
