TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 637X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner. The Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the aforesaid decision, has categorically stated that withholding of refund to an assessee is permissible only when other proceeding under the Act is pending or where the assessing authority is of the opinion that the grant of refund is likely to adversely affect the revenue. Where none of the aforesaid conditions or circumstances a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M Shivayogiswamy, Adv. For the Respondent : Sri S V Giri Kumar, AGA JUDGEMENT :- Petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to refund the excess tax paid by him, pursuant to notice dated 01/06/2012 issued by the second respondentauthority (Annexure-J) for the assessment period 2006-07 and 2007-08. The petitioner has also sought interest on that amount at the rate of 6% p.a. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der that document, the petitioner is entitled to refund of ₹ 1,06,89,301/- after adjustment of tax dues. The grievance of the petitioner is that since June 2012, the said amount has not been refunded. Hence, a direction is sought in that regard. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the respondent and perused the materi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed at this stage. 6. In response to that, petitioner s counsel contended that the writ petition was filed on 08/07/2014 and the draft notice has been prepared only for the purpose of persuading this Court to decline to grant relief to the petitioner. He also contended that as no notice has been issued to the petitioner, he is entitled for refund in terms of the re-revised notice referred to abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und or reason to withhold the refund, particularly when it is not shown that the Commissioner of Commercial Tax has already initiated revisional proceedings under the Act.The aforesaid dictum is squarely applicable in the present case. In the circumstances, the authorities are directed to refund ₹ 1,06,89,301/- along with interest at 6% p.a. in accordance with Section 50 of the Act within a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
