TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 which are relevant in this appeal. - Assuming that the tax had been paid by the appellant and had been recovered from the consumers, the matter would end there. The appellant would not be burdened with any tax itself. However, the appellant was compelled to deposit the entire purchase tax element with the Assessing Authorities as a condition precedent to the maintainability of its appeal. Far from being unjustly enriched the appellant in this manner is actually out of the pocket to the extent of the amount paid as a condition precedent to the maintainability of the appeal. In the event of the same being refunded, there would be no question of unjust enrichment. Conversely assuming that the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon the selling dealer of appellant i.e. M/s. Haryana Organics as well as the appellant for the same transaction? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in coming to a conclusion that the price of goods sold by the appellant/assessee included the tax despite the fact that this finding has never been given by any of the lower authorities nor it was confronted by the assessee during the course of arguments before this Hon ble Tribunal? (3) Whether the authorities under the act can levy any tax on the ground of undue enrichment, even though there is no provision for the same? The substantial question of law really is whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the appellant s claim on the ground of unjust enrichment. 3. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders in CWP No. 18240 of 1997, considered the matter afresh and issued the eligibility certificate in favour of M/s. Haryana Organics. The certificates granted sales tax exemption of ₹ 496.82 lacs for a period of 9 years from the date of commercial production namely 31.03.1994 to 30.03.2003. In order words, the exemption was granted in respect of the assessment year 1998-99 and 1999-2000, which are relevant in the above appeals. 4. While the proceedings were pending between M/s. Haryana Organics and the respondents regarding the former s application for exemption under Section 13-B of the Act read with Rule 28-A:- (i) assessment orders had been passed in respect of M/s. Haryana Organics. In view of the exemption having been subs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable. The Tribunal, therefore, admitted the review petition. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that the appellant was no longer liable to pay the tax. However, the review was rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal held:- 9....................So far as purchases of alcohol effected from M/s. Haryana Organics during the year 1998-99 is concerned, by admission of both, the seller and the purchaser, the price of the alcohol charged was inclusive of sales tax applicable at the relevant time, therefore, it would be legally justifiable to presume that as a prudent businessman, the applicant-assessee ought to have factored the element of tax in the price of alcohol (purchased by him) in the price of liquor manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
