TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the tax on the sales made by it to the various licence holders, who were holding license from the agricultural deparmtent. The fertilisers sold by the petitioner, both D. A. P. and M. O. P., were subjected to the Price Control Order fixed by the Government and all the salers were made at the price fixed by the Central Government under the Fertiliser Control Order. 3. The State Government issued a notification under Section 4 (a) read with Section 25 of the Act granting exemption from payment of tax on M.O.P. and D.A.P. of 18:46:0 with effect from 1st June, 2000 by notification dated 10th November, 2000 with the result M.O.P. has been totally exempted with effect from 1st June, 2000 to 31st December, 2000 by the aforesaid notification dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground that the amount of tax has not been refunded in accordance with the procedure prescribed for refund of the amount under Section 29-A (3) of the Act read with Rule 107 of the U. P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948 (in short the Rules). 5. We have heard Sri Bharatji Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Sri R. D. Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondents. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had not illegally realised the tax from the purchasers inasmuch as the tax was realisable on the sale when it realised from the purchasers but the notification exempting the tax was issued giving effect retrospectively and, therefore, the provisions of Section 29-A of the Act is not applicable. Section 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Section 29-A and Rule 107 of the Rules read as under: (3) Where any amount is deposited by any dealer under sub-section (1), such amount or any part thereof shall, on a claim, being made in that be refunded, in the manner prescribed, to the person from whom such dealer, had actually realised such amount or part, or to his legal representatives, and to no other person: Provided that no such claim shall be entertained after the expiry of three years from the date of the order of assessment or one year from any date of the final order on appeal, revision or reference, if any, in respect thereof, whichever is later. 10. Learned Counsel for the respondents Sri Gupta submitted that the refund is to be made only in accordance with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot record any specific finding as to whether, in fact, the petitioner had refunded the entire amount which it had realised as tax from the purchasers. 12. The petitioner is alleged to have realised the tax of ₹ 38,45,479. The Assessing Authority is to make enquiry from the purchasers whether, in fact, this much amount has been refunded to them. The petitioner, if proves that this amount has been refunded, the Assessing Authority shall pass an appropriate order in this regard. In case the petitioner proves that the entire amount of ₹ 38,45,479 has not been paid to the purchasers, it may be entitled to adjustment only such amount which it proves that it has been refunded to the purchasers. The Assessing Authority may give notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
