TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be appropriate. - Civil Appeal No. 1084 of 2004, & 1085 of 2004, - - - Dated:- 17-2-2004 - DORAISWAMY RAJU AND ARIJIT PASAYAT JJ. Mrs, Kirti Renu Mishra, P.N. Gupta, Sunil Kr. Jain and Bibek Mohanti, Other Advocates. T.R. Andhyarujina and Dinesh Dwivedi, Senior Advocates. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the Court was delivered by AEIJIT PASAYAT, J. - Leave granted. 2.. These two appeals are inter-linked being directed against the judgment of the Orissa High Court in Writ Petition No. O.J.C. 13435 of 2000 Reported as Orient Paper Mills v. Sales Tax Officer [2004] 134 STC 128. The writ application was filed by Orient Paper Mills (hereinafter referred to as "the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ult of the writ petition. It was made clear in the order that if the assessee was entitled to any refund, it can ask for the same together with interest which would be calculated on and from the date of deposit and not from the date of formal application for refund. It may be noted here that the assessee had moved an application for stay before the Commissioner of Sales Tax who had directed the assessee to deposit a sum of rupees one crore by September 15, 1996. Against that order the assessee filed a Writ Petition O.J.C. No. 9735 of 1996. By order dated September 17, 1996 taking into account the fact that the assessee had already deposited rupees 50 lakhs pursuant to the directions given in the other writ petition, the High Court directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld also apply to the subsequent order dated September 17, 1996. 5.. The stand of the Revenue on the other hand was that in terms of Full Bench decision of the High Court in O.J.C. No. 9087 of 1997 disposed of on October 16, 2000 Reported as I.D.L. Industries Ltd. v. State of Orissa [2004] 134 STC 62., interest on refund of deposit made pursuant to the directions of the court has to be from such date, and at such rates as may be directed by the court. As in the present case, there was no direction about the rate at which interest was to be payable, the Commissioner had allowed a reasonable rate of 10 per cent. Reference was made to the amendment of section 14-C that with effect from October 3, 2000, it was submitted, the rate indicated in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of 18 per cent for the first 90 days and at the rate of 24 per cent thereafter from the date of making the formal application for refund. 8.. While the revenue has questioned correctness of the judgment in SLP(C) No. 1513 of 2002, the assessee has filed the connected SLP(C) No. 1898 of 2002 making a grievance that in respect of the sum of Rs. 25,00,000 also the interest should have been directed to be paid from the date of deposit. 9.. Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revenue, has submitted that the High Court has erroneously applied the provisions of section 14-C to the facts of the case. The said provision has no application to the facts of the case. In any event the High Court has not analysed the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e at variance with the statutory provision while exercising writ jurisdiction, as an equitable measure the court can pass such order as it may deem proper, but in no way going beyond the permissible extent of exercising the jurisdiction. As was observed by this Court in Tata Refractories Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer (2003) 1 SCC 65 See [2003] 129 STC 506 (SC). while dealing with an identical dispute it was held as follows: "It is to be noted that the order of the High Court in earlier writ petition namely, O.J.C. No. 1200 of 1995 was made by the High Court in the exercise of its power under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India wherein while directing the appellants to deposit the amount quantified therein, the High Court also is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The High Court erroneously applied the import of section 14-C to the facts of the present case. 11.. In our considered view, taking note of the usual rate of interest which is granted in cases involving refund of money, 12 per cent interest in terms of the High Court's order on the sum of Rs. 50,00,000 paid pursuant to the order dated March 11, 1996 would be appropriate in the absence of any specific rate of interest stipulated by the court itself, as a condition of the order itself. So far as the sum of Rs. 25,00,000 is concerned, admittedly, there was no stipulation made regarding refund, much less, about the rate of interest. But the Commissioner seems to have erroneously proceeded on the basis as if it was to some extent covered by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
