ORDER 1. Leave granted. By consent, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by the following order. The issue which arises for determination in these civil appeals is limited to the question regarding interest on refund claimed by the assessee in respect of Assessment Year 1999-2000. By the impugned order, the claim has been allowed, hence, these civil appeals are filed by the Department. 2. On going through the impugned order, we find that the High Court has failed to examine the scope of Section 44(2) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (the 1973 Act), it is well settled that claim of interest should be founded either in the statute or in the agreement between the parties. 3. Section 44 reads as under: "44. Power to withhold refund.-(1) Where an order giving rise to a refund is the subject-matter of an appeal or further proceedings or where any other proceedings under this Act are pending, and the assessing authority or a person appointed to assist the Commissioner under sub-section (1). of Section 3, as the case may be, is of the opinion that the grant of the refund is likely to adversely affect the recovery, he may withhold the refund and refer the case to the Commissioner for order. The orders passed by the Commissioner shall be final. (2) The period during which the refund remains so withheld shall be excluded for the purpose of calculation of interest under Section 43." 4. According to the Department, on a plain reading of Section 44(2), reproduced above, there are circumstances in which a State is authorised to retain the amount of refund to protect the interest of the Revenue till the finalisation of proceedings under the 1973 Act, and in such cases, the legislature has stated that the period during which the refund remains withheld shall be excluded for the purposes of calculation of interest under Section 43 of the said 1973 Act. 5. In our view, the High Court was required to analyse Section 44(2) in the context of the facts of these cases. This has not been done. Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment and remit the cases to the High Court for de novo consideration in accordance with law. 5. In our view, the High Court was required to analyse Section 44(2) in the context of the facts of these cases. This has not been done. Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment and remit the cases to the High Court for de novo consideration in accordance with law. Before concluding, we direct the Department to refund the principal amount within five weeks failing which the Department has to pay interest on the principal amount under our orders at 12% per annum till payment. 6. Accordingly, the civil appeals are disposed of.