Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 929 (MAD)

STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED v. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER III, THOOTHUKUDI.

2006-04-03

P.JYOTHIMANI

body2006
ORDER P. JYOTHIMANI, J. - Heard Mr. S. Karunakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. V. Pandi, Government Advocate appearing for the respondent. By consent of the both the counsel, these petitions are taken up for final disposal. Since the issues involved in these writ petitions are common, common order is being passed. These writ petitions are filed for a direction against the respondent to issue refund vouchers with interest to the petitioner under section 24(4) of the TNGST Act, 1959, in pursuance of the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Tirunelveli, dated October 6, 2005. It is seen from the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated October 6, 2005, that the appeals were allowed and the order passed by the respondent has been set aside. It is stated that pending above appeals, the petitioner was directed to pay certain amount of tax in the said application. Now that the appeals have been allowed and the respondent's order has been set aside; the petitioner is entitled for the repayment of the amount paid by them. In view of the same, the petitioner has made a representation on March 14, 2006, clearly explaining the amount due by way of refund. In spite of the same, the amount has not been repaid by the respondent. Hence the petitioner has filed the present writ petitions. As per section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with section 24(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 along with rule 23A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959, the petitioner is entitled for the repayment of the amount paid in excess along with interest as contemplated under law, if there are no legal impediments. Under similar circumstances, this court has so held in W. P. No. 2910 of 2004, by order dated November 1, 2004 and in W.P. Nos. 1652 to 1656 of 2006, by order dated February 21, 2006. Under similar circumstances, this court has so held in W. P. No. 2910 of 2004, by order dated November 1, 2004 and in W.P. Nos. 1652 to 1656 of 2006, by order dated February 21, 2006. In view of the same, the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondent to give effect to the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Tirunelveli, dated October 6, 2005 which set aside the order of the respondent and consequently refund the amount of taxes paid in excess along with interest to the petitioner as contemplated under law, if there are no legal impediments, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. There is no order as to costs.