Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (3) TMI 1156 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2015 (3) TMI 1156 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - [2015] 84 VST 172 (Bom) - Non-allowance of interest on delayed provisional refund - Section 53 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 - Manufacturer in cotton yarn, hosiery fabrics, electronic goods holding certificate of entitlement during the period of assessment - Held that:- the Tribunal has rightly interpreted the provisions of sections 51, 52 and 53 of the MVAT Act while partly allowing the appeals. It is to be noted here that a conjoint readin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tax Appeal Nos. 4, 5,6 of 2015, VAT Second Appeal Nos. 252, 253, 254 of 2013 - Dated:- 24-3-2015 - B. R. Gavai and A. S. Gadkari, JJ. For the Appellant : Vinay Sonpal, Additional Government Pleader For the Respondent : P. V. Surte along with S. P. Surte JUDGMENT The present appeals under section 27 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 are decided by the following common order as they are between the same parties and the present appeals also involve the common question of law and have im .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rticles of fabric, i.e., bedsheets, etc. The respondent holds certificate of entitlement during the period of assessment. The respondent submitted assessment statements before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Kolhapur, for the assessment period for 2005-06 to 2007-08, precisely for the period April 1, 2005 to January 31, 2008. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax by its assessment order dated March 31, 2011 allowed refund to the respondent, however rejected the claim of the respondent for g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion 53 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax is confirmed. 5. The respondent thereafter preferred second appeals bearing Nos. 252, 253 and 254 of 2013, respectively against the impugned order therein dated October 25, 2013 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals), Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur. In the said appeals the respondent herein contended that he is holding eligibility certificate as well as entitlement certificate under the Pac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eriods 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, but very late. The respondent contended that after filing of the returns and form 501, he was entitled to get refund within six months from the end of the year, succeeding the said year. He claims that on provisional refund interest on delayed refund under section 53(1) of the MVAT Act was not granted. He further contended that the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Kolhapur, neither granted interest on delayed refund nor took up assessment of the appellant since .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deducting refund given to him from time to time between period 2006 to 2008. The respondent contended that no interest was allowed on the provisional refund which he had received from time to time for the period 2005-06. The respondent further claimed that in the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 provisional refunds were granted to him however no interest as contemplated under section 53(1) of the MVAT Act was granted on the delayed refund to it. It was the contention of the respondent that for all the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t herein to pay the interest over delayed payment by calculating the period as was directed in the said order. The Appellate Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellant herein was bound to pay interest on delayed provisional refund to the respondent herein as there was delay as contemplated under section 51(4) of the MVAT Act which was prevailing at the relevant time. 7. Shri Vinay Sonpal, learned Additional Government Pleader contended that the Appellate Tribunal has committed error in a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submitted that as there was no delay in view of section 51(4) of the MVAT Act, 2002, the learned Appellate Tribunal has committed grave error in appreciating the said provision, inter alia, thereby passing the impugned order. 8. Shri. P. V. Surte, learned counsel appearing for the respondent per contra submitted that the period of 18 months has been extended by way of amendment to section 51(4) of the MVAT Act and has been brought on the statute book by an amendment bearing No. M5 of 2011 with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ndent. Shri. P. V. Surte by relying upon a judgment reported in [1953] 4 STC 114 (SC) ; AIR 1953 SC 221 in the case of (Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh) contended that the amended provision comes into effect from the date of amendment and it has no retrospective effect for its operation. 9. It is the settled position of law that the amendment of section or provision does not apply to proceedings commenced before amendment unless and until the Legislature is absolutely .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version