Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

SHREE ASSOCIATES Versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND 1

Application for remission and claim for refund - Held that:- The sum of ₹ 50 lakhs, ordered to be deposited by the petitioner, must be seen in the light of the petitioner’s possible liability of tax, which may be ascertained at a future date. Till this is done, such amount would remain in the nature of a deposit, which the Government would hold in trust. Till the Government framed the remission scheme on 18.11.2014, no such tax liability was ascertained through any order of assessment. 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

eing satisfied by the petitioner. - The petitioner’s application for remission and the petitioner’s claim for refund of ₹ 50 lakhs deposited pursuant to the Courts directions, thus were segregated. The stand of the authorities that such amount of ₹ 50 lakhs was deposited by way of tax prior to the scheme and, therefore, cannot be refunded, cannot be accepted. - In fact, we have some doubt about the correct interpretation of para-13 of the scheme which refers to no refund of 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

ulfilled. - Under the circumstances, the respondents shall refund a sum of ₹ 50 lakhs to the petitioner with simple interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of the deposit till refund, which shall be done latest by 30th September, 2016. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10687 of 2016 - Dated:- 11-8-2016 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.J. SHASTRI, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : MR TUSHAR P HEMANI, ADVOCATE, MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GP/PP .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntracts was not free from doubt, and eventually came to be settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Larsen & Turbo Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka & Anr., 2014(1) SCC 708 4. This judgment resulted into substantial tax liabilities on various construction contractors in the State that too for past period. The State Government, therefore, framed a remission scheme under the circular dated 18.11.2014 giving soft terms for payment of past taxes to these contractors and develope .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ioner, the Court lifted the attachment of the petitioner's bank account subject to the following conditions; i) The petitioner files an undertaking before this Court that 33 flats mentioned above are fully constructed, are not sold, assigned or booked in favour of any one, are free from any encumbrance and have fully clear and marketable title vesting in the petitioner. ii) The petitioner shall also undertake that such flats shall not be sold, transferred or assigned nor any charge shall be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

₹ 25 lakhs to the respondents which shall be initially for a period of one year and shall be renewed from time to time till the assessments are over. 3.1 The respondents are expected to complete the assessment expeditiously. 3.2 It is clarified that the bank accounts of the petitioner shall be released as soon as the undertaking, as provided in para (i) of the conditions is filed before this Court, with a copy to respondent No. 3. 6. It is undisputed that the petitioner deposited such amo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dit thereof be given accordingly. Along with the application, the petitioner annexed a detailed statement of facts, in which, he highlighted this aspect pointing out that under the order of the High Court dated 24.3.2014, on different dates, the petitioner has deposited a total sum of ₹ 50 lakhs. 8. On 10.4.2015, the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax conveyed to the petitioner that the petitioner cannot adjust the said sum of ₹ 50 lakhs for the benefit under the scheme dated 18.11 .....

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 ₹ 28,06,997/-, out of which, he gave credit of ₹ 15,73,133/- paid by the petitioner along with the application and raised a net demand of ₹ 15,70,704/- which was inclusive of the remaining tax of ₹ 12,33,864/- with interest. The petitioner deposited such sum also and, thus, was granted the benefit of remission scheme. 11. The petitioner, however, continued to pray for refund of the said sum of ₹ 50 lakhs deposited pursuant to the order of the High Court. On 10.7.2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rising for past period by virtue of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Larsen and Turbo Ltd. & Anr. vs. State of Karnataka & Anr. (supra). Under the scheme, a person engaged in civil works contract could apply, upon which, he would get the benefit of waiver of interest and penalty on the basic tax liability. There were other concessions also. Even in the case where any assessment or reassessment or revision was pending, in which, the question of tax, interest and penalty wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

und of such amount paid will be given to the dealer taking benefit of this scheme 13. The State Government relies on this para to contend that the petitioner, having already paid ₹ 50 lakhs towards the tax liability, cannot claim adjustment of such sum under the terms of the scheme. This is the crux of the controversy between the parties. In the background of such controversy, it is necessary to decide whether the sum of ₹ 50 lakhs deposited by the petitioner was by way of tax. If th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

attachment of the bank accounts of the petitioner. At that stage, there was no final order of assessment framed by the authorities. While lifting such attachment, the Court, in the order dated 24.3.2014, provided for certain safeguards. Noticing that the approximate tax liability of the petitioner, which could be disputed was in the vicinity of ₹ 50 lakhs. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit such sum with the State Tax Authorities. However, the direction was clear and was to depos .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Till this is done, such amount would remain in the nature of a deposit, which the Government would hold in trust. Till the Government framed the remission scheme on 18.11.2014, no such tax liability was ascertained through any order of assessment. The same therefore could not have been treated as a payment of tax. May be, the petitioner s request for adjustment of such amount at the stage of considering the petitioner s request for remission, was turned down, however, this would not conclude 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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